Skip to main content

Full text of "The Naked Communist"

See other formats


W. Cleon Skousen 







% 



The Ensign Publishing Company, Salt Lake City, Utah 



© Copyright 1958, 1960, 1961, by the Ensign Publishing Co. All rights 
reserved. Without permission in writing from the publisher, none of 
the art work in this book may be reproduced nor may any portion of 
the text be quoted except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages 
in connection with a review. All correspondence and inquiries should 
be directed to the Ensign Publishing Company, P. 0. Box 2316, 
Salt Lake City 10, Utah. Printed in the United States of America. 


Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 58-lU64 


ELEVENTH EDITION 
January, 1962 


13th Printing, 1972 


Designed by Keith Eddington, illustrated by Arnold Friberg 


“THE CONFLICT BETWEEN COMMUNISM AND 
FREEDOM IS THE PROBLEM OF OUR TIME. IT 
OVERSHADOWS ALL OTHER PROBLEMS. THIS 
CONFLICT MIRRORS OUR AGE, ITS TOILS, 
ITS TENSIONS, ITS TROUBLES, AND ITS 
TASKS. ON THE OUTCOME OF THIS CONFLICT 
DEPENDS THE FUTURE OF ALL MANKIND.” 


George Meany 

President, AFL-CIO 



PREFACE 


One of the most fantastic phenomena of modern times has 
been the unbelievable success of the Communist conspiracy to 
enslave mankind. Part of this has been the result of two 
species of ignorance — ignorance concerning the constitutional 
requirements needed to perpetuate freedom, and secondly, ig- 
norance concerning the history, philosophy and strategy of 
World Communism. 

This study is designed to bring the far-flung facts about 
Communism into a single volume. It contains a distillation 
of more than one hundred books and treatises — many of them 
written by Communist authors. It attempts to present the 
Communist in his true native elements, stripped of propaganda 
and pretense. Hence, the title, “The Naked Communist.” 

Students in the western part of the world have a tendency to 
shy away from the obscure complexity of Communism because 
they have a feeling they are groping about in a vacuum of un- 
known quantities. It therefore became the author’s objective 
many years ago to try and clarify these concepts so that they 
could be more readily understood and thereby become less 
frightening. The most terrifying of all human fears is “fear 
of the unknown” and consequently it seemed highly desirable 
to disarm the Communist revolutionists of any such supreme 
advantage by spreading before the student the whole picture 
of Marxism which is simply “modern materialism in action.” 

A panoramic study of Communism might easily degener- 
ate into a long list of dates, names, and platitudes without 
helping the student to gain a genuine understanding of the his- 
tory and philosophy of Marxism. Therefore, in this study, an 
attempt has been made to present Communism as the living, 
breathing, vibrating force in the earth which it really is. The 


political development, the philosophy, the economic theory and 
the big names in World Communism have all been presented 
in their historical setting. 

Since an ever increasing number of disillusioned Com- 
munist officials have fled from behind the Iron Curtain, it 
has been possible to remove much of the mystery which 
formerly obscured a correct understanding of the Marxian- 
disciplined mind. This study therefore presents the Marxian 
civilization without reference to its propaganda claims but 
within the realm of reality where, during each passing day, 
millions of human beings are vicariously learning for the rest 
of the race the true meaning of life under Communism. 

To those who have never taken occasion to study the past 
one hundred years of Marxism, this presentation may at first 
seem somewhat harsh. But that is because the exposed seams 
of Communism are inherently harsh. Marx designed it that 
way. From a comfortable armchair in a cloistered study it is 
sometimes difficult for a student to catch the spirit and sub- 
stance of Communism in action. But the Korean veteran, the 
Iron Curtain refugee, the returning ambassador from Mos- 
cow — these who have felt the physical and psychological 
impact of World Communism — may count this study under- 
drawn and overconservative. 

The reader should be warned that the complex nature 
of Communism prevents some of this material from being 
geared to rapid reading. Sometimes whole volumes have been 
digested into a few paragraphs. It will be helpful to the 
reader if sufficient time is taken to explore rather thoroughly 
the technical or philosophical chapters before proceeding. To 
help the reader identify the most significant points in the 
text, a list of preliminary questions is presented at the be- 
ginning of each chapter. While seeking to be brief, the 
author hopes he has not been obscure. 

There are many to whom I am indebted for assistance, 
suggestions and technical data used in connection with the 
preparation of this work. Since the writing and much of the 
research was completed while I was a member of the faculty 
of Brigham Young University I received much valuable help 
from the members of the faculty as well as the administrative 
staff. I am also indebted to several of my former associates 


in the FBI with whom I studied Communist philosophy, Com- 
munist subversion and Communist espionage during my six- 
teen years with that organization. 

The impressive vignette illustrations heading each chapter 
throughout this book are the work of the famous American 
artist, Arnold Friberg. They exemplify his ability to con- 
dense a complex idea into a simple, forceful, pictorial symbol. 
His magnificent gallery of Biblical paintings which he did for 
Cecil B. DeMille's production of “The Ten Commandments” 
has been widely acclaimed during their worldwide tour of 
exhibition. I am proud to have the text of these pages en- 
hanced by the talented hand of such a good friend. 

Another close associate, Keith Eddington, is responsible 
for the striking jacket and impressive design of this book. 

The tedious task of typing the manuscript and reams of 
research data for the project was capably performed by Velora 
Gough Stuart and Louise Godfrey. 

The bulk of the credit for the final completion of the work 
should go to my wife who efficiently managed the affairs of 
eight robust offspring while their father completed the re- 
search and writing for the manuscript. I am deeply grateful to 
all those who contributed time, skill and encouragement to 
bring the work to final fruition. 

W. CLEON SKOUSEN 
Salt Lake City, Utah, November 1, 1958 


Preface to the Eleventh Edition 

The generous acceptance of this book by the public has been 
both encouraging and gratifying. In this edition, as in several 
of the others, I have included some new material in order to 
keep the study up to date. 

W. CLEON SKOUSEN 
Salt Lake City, Utah, January 1, 1962 



CONTENTS 


The Rise of the Marxist Man — I 

I 

The Founders of Communism — 7 

London, 1853 

The Early Life of Karl Marx 
Marx as a Young Man 
Friedrich Engels 
The Communist Manifesto 
The Revolution of 1848 
The End of the Communist League 
The Family of Karl Marx 
The Founding of the First International 
Marx Writes a Book to Change the World 
The Closing Years 
Epilogue 

II 

The Appeal of Communism — 31 

The Case for Communism 
The Communist Philosophy of Nature 
The Origin of Life, Consciousness and Mind 
A Brief Critique of the Communist Philosophy of Nature 



The Communist Approach 


to the Solution of World Problems 


43 


The Communist Interpretation of History 
Human Progress Explained in Terms of Class Struggle 
The Communist Theory Concerning Private Property 
The Communist Theory of the Origin of the State 
The Communist Theory of the Origin and Economic Significance of Religion 
The Communist Theory of the Origin and Economic Significance of Morals 
The Communist Plan of Action 
The Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
The Classless, Stateless Society Under Full Communism 


IV 

A Brief Critique 

of the Communist Approach to World Problems — 61 

Communism as a By-Product of the Industrial Revolution 
The Communist Interpretation of History 
The Communist Explanation of Society 
The Origin of the State 
What Is Religion ? 

The Communist Theory of Morals 
The Communist Theory of Class Struggle 
The Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
The Stateless, Classless Society Under Full Communism 
Communism as a Negative Approach to Problem-Solving 


V 


The Rise of the Revolutionary Movement in Russia 


89 


Marxism Comes to Russia 
The Early Life of Nikolai (V. I.) Lenin 
Origin of the Bolsheviks 
Background of Leon Trotsky 
The Russian Revolution of 1905 
Background of Joseph Stalin 
Stalin Engages in Criminal Activities 
Stalin as a Union Organizer, Writer and Bolshevik Leader 
The Role of Russia in World War I 


VI 

How Russia Became a Communist World Power — 109 

The Russian Revolution of March, 1917 
The Destruction of Russia’s Plans for a Democracy 
Russia Repudiates Communism at the Polls 
Lenin Takes Russia Out of the War 
The First Attempt to Communize Russia 
The End of a Communist Dream 
The Rise of Stalin to Power 
The First Five-Year Plan 
The Communist Crisis of 1932-33 
U. S. Recognition of Communist Russia Comes at a Critical Time 
Joseph Stalin’s Return to Power 
Stalin Creates a New Class 


VII 

Communism in the United States — 131 


American Founding Fathers Try Communism 
Marxism Comes to the United States 
The First Wave of Communist Violence Strikes the United States 
William Z. Foster Launches the Communist Labor Union Drive 
The Growth of U. S. Communism as Seen by Whittaker Chambers 
Whittaker Chambers Breaks with Communism 
Elizabeth Bentley Takes Over After Chambers Leaves 
THE SILVERMASTER CELL 
THE PERLO CELL 


VIII 

Communism and World War II — 155 

The Rise of Adolf Hitler and Nazism in Germany 
The Communists Claim Credit for Starting World War II 
Stalin Suffers a Strategic Defeat 
World War II Moves Closer to the United States 
The U. S. Policy of Coexistence Goes into Its Third Stage 
The Story of American Lend-Lease to Russia 
Russian Attempts to Secure the Secrets of the Atomic Bomb 
Closing Months of World War II 
U. S. Policy of Coexistence Enters the Fourth Stage 
Creation of the United Nations 
Communist Attitudes at the Close of World War II 


IX 

Communist Attacks on the Free World 
During the Post-War Period — 177 

The Decay in U. S. - Soviet Relations at the End of World War II 
The Free World Loses 100 Million People 
The Free World Loses China with Her 450 Million People 
Effect of the Yalta Agreement on Post-War China 
Chiang Kai-shek Attempts to Create a Democracy in China 
Disaster Strikes Down an Old U. S. Ally 
The Wedemeyer Report 
The State Department White Paper of 1949 
An Amazing Development 
The Communist Attack on South Korea 
The Korean Armistice 

The U. S. Summarily Abandons Its Twenty-Year Policy of Appeasement 
The Role of the FBI in the Battle of the Underground 
The Crack in the Iron Curtain 
The Communist Conquest in lndo-China 
The Task of Isolating a World Aggressor 
Russia Tests the New U. S. “Get Tough” Policy 

X 

Communism Under Khrushchev — 209 

Khrushchev as the Dictator of the Ukraine 
How Khrushchev Seized Power 
The Hungarian Revolution — 1956 
The UN Investigation of the Hungarian Revolution 
Inside Khrushchev’s Russia 
The Hazardous Life of a Communist Dictator 
Khrushchev’s Scheme to Force the U. S. to Invite Him to America 
Was Khrushchev’s Visit a Mistake? 


Aftermath of the Khrushchev Visit 
The U-2 Incident 
The RB-47 Incident 
The Space Race 

The March of Communism in Africa 
The Tragedy in the Congo 


XI 

The Communist Conquest of Cuba — 237 

Who Is Fidel Castro? 

Castro’s Second Attempt at Murder Is Successful 
Castro as a Soviet Agent in the Bogota Riots 
Castro Commits His Third Murder 
The Batista Regime in Cuba 
The Castro Coup D’Etat 
The Communist Take-Over 


XII 

The Future Task — 253 

The Communist Timetable of Conquest 
Importance of the Psychological War 
Current Communist Goals 
What About Disarmament? 

What About Peaceful Coexistence? 

What About the United Nations? 

Is the Communist Movement a Legitimate Political Party? 

Is the Soviet Empire Vulnerable to Economic Pressure? 

Could Peaceful Pressures Cause the Communist Empire to Explode Internally? 
What Can the Ordinary Individual Do? 

Suggestions for Parents 


Suggestions for Teachers 
Suggestions for Students 
Suggestions for Businessmen 
Suggestions for Legislators 
Suggestions for the Press 
Suggestions for Ministers 
The West Can Win 


Historical Photographs 


FIVE VITAL QUESTIONS 

1 

Whaf Do the Defenders of Communism Say? — 289 

PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE 
ILLEGAL OPERATIONS 
REVOLUTIONARY VIOLENCE 
WAR AND PEACE 

THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL 
DIPLOMATIC INTRIGUE 
ETHICS AND MORALS 
THE BIBLE 
RELIGION 

INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND CIVIL LIBERTIES 
EDUCATION 
LABOR 


2 

How Does a People Build a Free Nation? — 317 

Rise of the Liberals 

Political Philosophy of American Founding Fathers 
A Philosophy Becomes a Reality 
Results of 175 Years of American Liberalism 
The Pattern for Abundant Living 

3 

What Is Free Enterprise Capitalism? — 327 

The Nature of Man 
Man’s Mainspring of Action 
The Law of Variation 
Under Capitalism Everyone Can Gain 
The Meaning of a Free Economy 

1. FREEDOM TO TRY 3. FREEDOM TO BUY 

2. FREEDOM TO SELL 4. FREEDOM TO FAIL 

How Capitalism Makes Things Plentiful and Cheap 

The Law of Supply and Demand Sets the Price 
Failure of an American Experiment with Socialism 

4 

Did the Early Christians Practice Communism? — 343 


5 

What Is the Secret Weapon of Communism? — 347 

Who Inspired Hitler? 

What Was the Mission of Karl Marx? 

Pirates of Science and Religion 


Men Who Worship Themselves 
The Fruits of Materialism 
Communists without Labels 
First Major Premise of Communism 
Second Major Premise 
Third Major Premise 
Fourth Major Premise 
Can Communist Beliefs Hurt Us? 

What Puzzled Gouzenko Most? 

Treason in High Places 
The Secret Weapon of Communism 
Home-Made Materialism 

Conversation between a Student and a Professor 
The Bible Provides Its Own Rebuttal 
Sometimes Students Puzzle Parents 
What About Atomic-Bomb Security? 

Would the Ten Commandments Frighten a Communist? 
Who Has Seen God? 

How Important Is an Oath? 

The Fourth Commandment 
A Vacuum in the Training of Youth 
Are Elderly People Important? 

What About Communist Purges? 

Significance of Marital Integrity 
The Thief and the Character Assassin 
The Sanctity of Work 
The Christian Code 
A New Dynamic Trend in Education 


Bibliography — 379 


Index — 385 





The Rise off the Marxist Man 


It is a terrible and awesome thing when a man sets out to 
create all other men in his own image. Such became the goal 
and all consuming ambition of Karl Marx. Not that he would 
have made each man equal to himself ; in fact, it was quite the 
contrary. The image he hoped to construct was a great human 
colossus with Karl Marx as the brain and builder and all other 
men serving him as the ears and eyes, feet and hands, mouth 
and gullet. In other words, Marx surveyed the world and 
dreamed of the day when the whole body of humanity could 
be forced into a gigantic social image which conformed com- 
pletely to Marx’s dream of a perfect society. 

To achieve his goal, Marx required two things. First, the 
total annihilation of all opposition, the downfall of all existing 
governments, all economies and all societies. “Then,” he 
wrote, “I shall stride through the wreckage a creator!” The 
second thing he needed was a new kind of human being. 

He visualized a regimented breed of Pavlovian men whose 
minds could be triggered into immediate action by signals 
from their masters. He wanted a race of men who would no 
longer depend upon free will, ethics, morals or conscience for 
guidance. Perhaps, without quite realizing it, Marx was set- 


The Naked Communist 


ting out to create a race of human beings conditioned to think 
like criminals. 

Producing such a race had been the dream of power- 
hungry men for more than 4000 years. Nimrod had projected 
the design, Plato polished it, Saint Simon sublimated it — now 
Marx materialized it. 

Today this breed of criminally conditioned man walks the 
earth in sufficient numbers to conquer countries or continents, 
to change laws and boundaries, to decree war or peace. He 
might well be called Homo-Marxian — the Marxist Man. He 
has made it terribly clear that he intends to become the man of 
the twentieth century. 

Homo-Marxian is frightening and puzzling to the rest of 
humanity because a criminally conditioned mind does not 
respond the way normal people expect. 

For example, if a well meaning person invited a profes- 
sional criminal into his home for dinner the shifty eyed guest 
would be likely to survey the fine variety of choice foods, the 
expensive silverware and shiny goblets, and completely miss 
the warm sincerity and friendship which the host was trying 
to convey. In fact, the criminal mind would probably con- 
clude that his host was not only soft hearted but soft headed. 
Eventually, he would get around to deciding that such a weak 
man could not possibly deserve so many fine things. Then 
he would spend the rest of the evening figuring out how he 
could return in the darkness of the night and relieve his host 
of all his bounteous treasures. 

Anyone familiar with the history of Communist leader- 
ship during the past one hundred years will immediately 
recognize this same kind of mind at work. The flagrant abuse 
of U.S. friendship and generosity during World War II is 
typical. 

Homo-Marxian puzzles all those who try to work with 
him because he seems irrational and therefore unpredictable. 
In reality, however, the Marxist Man has reduced his think- 
ing to the lowest common denominator of values taken from 
nature in the raw. He lives exclusively by the jungle law 


Marxist Man 


of selfish survival. In terms of these values he is rational 
almost to the point of mathematical precision. Through calm 
or crisis his responses are consistently elemental and there- 
fore highly predictable. 

Because Homo-Marxian considers himself to be made en- 
tirely of the dust of the earth, he pretends to no other role. 
He denies himself the possibility of a soul and repudiates his 
capacity for immortality. He believes he had no creator and 
has no purpose or reason for existing except as an incidental 
accumulation of accidental forces in nature. 

Being without morals, he approaches all problems in a 
direct, uncomplicated manner. Self-preservation is given as 
the sole justification for his own behavior, and “selfish mo- 
tives or stupidity” are his only explanations for the behavior 
of others. With Homo-Marxian the signing of fifty-three 
treaties and subsequent violation of fifty-one of them is not 
hypocrisy but strategy. The subordination of other men’s 
minds to the obscuring of truth is not deceit but a necessary 
governmental tool. Marxist Man has convinced himself that 
nothing is evil which answers the call of expediency. He has 
released himself from all the confining restraints of honor 
and ethics which mankind has previously tried to use as a 
basis for harmonious human relations. 

History is demonstrating that because of his mental con- 
ditioning, Homo-Marxian is probably the most insecure of 
all men in his feelings. Since he believes himself to be an 
accidental phenomenon in a purposeless universe, he has an 
insatiable appetite to bring all things under his total domina- 
tion. He admits that until this is done he cannot feel secure. 
Not only must he conquer the human race, but he has 
assigned himself the task of conquering matter, conquering 
space, and conquering all the forces of cosmic reality so as 
to bring order out of natural chaos. He must do this, he 
says, because man is the only creature in existence which 
has the accidental but highly fortunate capacity to do intelli- 
gent, creative thinking. He believes that since Homo-Marxian 
is the most advanced type of man, he must accept the responsi- 
bilities of a supreme being. He is perfectly sincere in his 


The Naked Communist 


announcement that Homo-Marxian proposes to become the ulti- 
mate governor and god of the earth and then of the universe. 

Under the impact of such sweeping theoretical ambitions, 
many non-Marxists have been caught in the emotional tide of 
this ideological fantasia and have allowed themselves to be 
carried along in the current toward the shores of what they 
hoped would be a promised land of man-made godliness. How- 
ever, in recent years a growing number of these pilgrims have 
risked life itself to come back to reality. Each one returns 
with the same story. Homo-Marxian was found to behave 
exactly like the graduate creature from the jungle which he 
believes himself to be. He regards all others with fearful 
suspicion and responds to each problem as though his very 
existence were at stake. Although he demands the right to 
rule humanity, he disdainfully rejects the most basic lessons 
learned during thousands of years of human experience. Re- 
turning pilgrims bear one witness : Homo-Marxian has 
reversed the direction of history. He has turned man against 
himself. 

It is in this historical crisis that man finds himself today. 
Marxist Man could not have come upon the earth at a more 
illogical time. In an age when technological advances have 
finally made it feasible to adequately feed, clothe and house 
the entire human race, Marxist Man stands as a military threat 
to this peaceful achievement. His sense of insecurity drives 
him to demand exclusive control of human affairs in a day 
when nearly all other peoples would like to create a genuine 
United Nations dedicated to world peace and world-wide pros- 
perity. Although man can travel faster than sound and po- 
tentially provide frequent, intimate contacts between all 
cultures and all peoples, Marxist Man insists on creating iron 
barriers behind which he can secretly work. 

Marxist Man makes no secret of his ultimate objectives. 
He is out to rule the world. Because Homo-Marxian is still 
an adolescent he knows he cannot devour the whole human 
race in one greedy gulp. Therefore, he must be satisfied with 
one chunk at a time. As we shall see later, he has adopted 
an orderly “time-table of conquest” which he is following 


Marxist Man 


with a deadly fixation. According to Communist prophecy, 
time is running out on the free world. 

This dilemma leaves the unconquered portion of fright- 
ened humanity with only three possible courses of future 
action : 

1. They can meekly capitulate. 

2. They can try to co-exist. 

3. They can set about to pull the blustering bully down. 

As far as this writer is concerned there is absolutely 

no question whatever as to the course of action free men 
must ultimately take. In fact, it is the only choice the law 
of survival allows. Surely no man who has felt the throbbing 
pound of freedom in his veins could countenance capitulation 
as a solution. And no man who knows what lies behind the 
lethal Communist program of “co-existence” would dare ac- 
cept that proposal as a long range solution. 

What then remains? 

Several years ago while serving with the FBI this writer 
became aware that the experts on Marxism have known for 
a long time that there are definite ways to stop Communism 
cold. Furthermore, if free men move in time, this can be 
done without a major war! That is why this book was written. 
It was written under the persuasion that modern men would 
be foolish indeed if they accepted the phenomenon of Homo- 
Marxian as a permanent fixture in the earth. 

There are well established and easily understood histori- 
cal reasons why every legitimate influence should be brought 
to bear on the removal of this roadblock from the pathway of 
normal human advancement. This must be done for the sake 
of Homo-Marxian as well as for the rest of humanity. He is 
the victim of a man-made experiment, trapped in his own 
self-perpetuating cycle of human negation. As long as free 
men are the prevailing majority in the earth there is a very 
good chance of breaking this cycle. To do so, however, free 
men must achieve an intelligent and dynamic solidarity at 
least as strong as the illusory but firmly fixed purposes of 
Homo-Marxian. 


The Naked Communist 


At the conclusion of this study there are listed a number 
of policies which, if used in time, could remove the roadblock 
that Marxist Man has thrown across the pathway of the race. 
These policies are solutions which automatically spring out of 
an understanding of the history, philosophy and ultimate 
objectives of Marxism. They are also the cold hard facts which 
have grown out of our bitter experiences in attempting to 
deal with Marxist Man. 

If enough people will study the problem and move across 
the world in one vast united front it is entirely possible that 
the race can celebrate the close of the Twentieth Century with 
this monumental achievement: 


Freedom in our time for all men! 





I 

The Founders off Communism 


In this chapter we shall try to become acquainted with two 
men. The first is Karl Marx, the originator of Communism, 
and the second is Friedrich Engels, his collaborator. We shall 
try to present their lives the way the Communists present 
them — not as the soft, visionary social reformers which so 
many text books seem anxious to describe, but rather as the 
two-fisted, power hungry revolutionists which their closest 
followers found them to be. Although presented in brief 
summary, this chapter attempts to include sufficient details so 
that the student of Communism can answer these questions: 

Why do Marxist writers call their founder a “genius” yet 
frankly admit he was “a violent, quarrelsome, contentious 
man, a dictator and a swashbuckler” ? 

Was Marx well educated? What was his nationality? 
Where did he do most of his revolutionary writing? 

author’s note: Because this book was written for high school 
seniors as well as college students and members of the armed forces, 
the author has deliberately avoided the use of research references 
such as ibid.y and op, cit. f lest they prove confusing. 


The Naked Communist 


How was it that Marx never acquired a profession, an 
office, an occupation or a dependable means of livelihood? 

How did Engels differ from Marx? 

What were the six principal goals which Marx and Engels 
set forth in the Communist Manifesto? 

Why did Marx believe one of his first tasks was to “de- 
throne God”? Why did he think his book, Capital, would 
change the world? 

Why did Marx fail in his two attempts to create organiza- 
tions for the promotion of world revolution? 


London, 1853 

On a chilly, foggy day in 1853, a British government 
official stood in the drizzling rain before the doorway of a 
human hovel in the heart of London’s slums. He knocked and 
after a short delay was admitted. As the officer entered the 
room thick clouds of smoke and tobacco fumes billowed about 
his head causing him to choke and cough while his eyes 
watered. Through the haze he saw the proprietor of the slum 
dwelling, a barrel-chested man with disheveled hair and a 
bushy beard. The man greeted the officer in a strong German 
accent, offered him a clay pipe and then motioned him toward 
a broken-backed chair. 

If the officer had not known better he would never have 
guessed that the bushy-bearded man who sat before him was 
a graduate of a university with a Ph.D. degree. Nor that the 
wife who had just hustled the children into a back room was 
the daughter of a German aristocrat. Yet such was the case. 
This was the residence of Dr. and Mrs. Karl Marx. 

At the moment Karl Marx was a political fugitive — having 
been driven from Germany, France and Belgium. England 
had granted him domicile along with other revolutionary 
leaders from the Continent and for this Marx was grateful. 
It gave him a lifelong base from which to continue his revolu- 
tionary work. 

On this particular day the presence of the officer was no 


The Founders of Communism 


cause for alarm. It was the routine check which the British 
Government made on all political exiles living in England. 
Nor was the officer hostile. He found the Marxes strange but 
interesting people who could engage in very lively conversation 
on world problems while sitting blissfully in a domestic en- 
vironment of incomprehensible confusion. The officer later 
included his puzzled observations concerning the Marxes in 
his official report: 

“(Marx) lives in one of the worst, therefore one of the 
cheapest, neighborhoods in London. He occupies two rooms. 
The room looking out on the street is the parlor, and the bed- 
room is at the back. There is not one clean or decent piece 
of furniture in either room, but everything is broken, 
tattered and torn, with thick dust over everything and the 
greatest untidiness everywhere. In the middle of the parlor 
there is a large old-fashioned table covered with oilcloth. On 
it there are manuscripts, books and newspapers, as well as 
the children’s toys, odds and ends and his wife’s sewing- 
basket, cups with broken rims, dirty spoons, knives and forks, 
lamps, an ink-pot, tumblers, some Dutch clay-pipes, tobacco 
ashes — all in a pile on the same table. . . . But all these things 
do not in the least embarrass Marx or his wife. You are 
received in the most friendly way and cordially offered pipes, 
tobacco and whatever else there may happen to be. Eventually 
a clever and interesting conversation arises which makes 
amends for all the domestic deficiencies .” 1 

Thus we are introduced to one of the most dramatic per- 
sonalities to cross the pages of history during the nineteenth 
century. And one who would have a greater impact dead 
than alive. Biographers would grapple with the enigma of 
Marx’s life. At one moment Marx would be called “the 
greatest genius of this age,” and a moment later even his 
disciples would feel forced to call him “a violent, quarrelsome, 
contentious man, a dictator and a swashbuckler, one at feud 
with all the world and continually alarmed lest he should be 
unable to assert his superiority .” 2 


1 Wilson, Edmund, “to the Finland station,” pp. 217-218. 

2 Ruhle, Otto, “KARL MARX,” pp. 209, 308. 


The Naked Communist 


Such were the contradictory, surging forces of human 
dynamics which found expression in the turbulent personality 
of Karl Marx. 


The Early Life of Karl Marx 

Karl Marx first saw the light of day at Treves, Germany, 
May 5, 1818. He certainly had no need to apologize for his 
progenitors. For many generations his male ancestors on both 
sides had been outstanding scholars and distinguished rabbis. 
However, the father of Karl Marx decided to break the ties 
of the past both religiously and professionally. He withdrew 
his family from the local synagogue to join the congregation 
of a local protestant faith and then reached out after pro- 
fessional recognition as a practicing attorney. Karl Marx 
was six years of age when the traditional moorings of the 
family were thus uprooted, and some biographers of Marx 
attribute his rejection of religion in later years to the conflicts 
which this sudden change in his life precipitated. 

In elementary school young Karl revealed himself to be a 
quick, bright scholar. He also revealed a quality which would 
plague him the rest of his life — his inability to keep a friend. 
Seldom, in all of Marx’s writings, do we find a reference to 
any happy boyhood associations. Biographers say he was too 
intense, too anxious to dominate the situation, too concerned 
about personal success, too belligerent in his self-assertiveness, 
to keep many friends. However, Karl Marx was not lacking 
in sentiment and genuine hunger for affection. At 17, when 
he began his university career, the letters which he wrote to 
his parents occasionally unveiled deeply sentimental, woman- 
like feelings. Here is an example : 

“In the hope that the clouds which hang over our family 
will gradually disperse ; that I shall be permitted to share your 
sufferings and mingle my tears with yours, and, perhaps, in 
direct touch with you, to show the profound affection, the 
immeasurable love, which I have not always been able to ex- 
press as I should like ; in the hope that you, too, my fondly and 


The Founders of Communism 


eternally loved Father, bearing in mind how much my feelings 
have been storm-tossed, will forgive me because my heart 
must often have seemed to you to have gone astray when the 
travail of my spirit was depriving it of the power of utterance ; 
in the hope that you will soon be fully restored to health, that 
I shall be able to clasp you in my arms, and to tell you all that 
I feel, I remain always your loving son, Karl.” 

Such expressions must have puzzled the elder Marx. 
Throughout his career as a father he was never able to counsel 
or cross this hot-tempered son without precipitating an emo- 
tional explosion. The letters of Karl Marx make frequent 
reference to the violent quarrels between himself and his 
parents; the letters from Karl’s parents complain of his ego- 
ism, his lack of consideration for the family, his constant 
demands for money and his discourtesy in failing to answer 
most of their letters. 

Marx as a Young Man 


It was in the fall of 1835 that Marx entered the University 
of Bonn to study law. This was a hectic year. He scandalized 
his parents by joining a tavern club, running himself deeply 
in debt and almost getting himself expelled for “nocturnal 
drunkenness and riot.” His studies were most unsatisfactory 
and he threatened to become a professional poet instead of a 
lawyer. In the summer of 1836 he fought a duel and received 
a wound over the eye. It was finally decided that it would be 
better for the University of Bonn if Karl Marx transferred 
to some other university. The elder Marx heartily agreed. 
Karl was sent to Berlin. 

It was at the University of Berlin that the intellectual 
forces in Karl Marx became sinews and the whole pattern of 
his life began to take shape. Although he complied with his 
father’s wishes and studied law, it was a half-hearted cam- 
ouflage to cover up his avid exploration of philosophy. In 
the midst of this exploration his father died and Marx im- 
mediately came out in the open with his announcement that 


The Naked Communist 


he would seek an academic career. He wanted to occupy a 
chair of philosophy at some university. Marx chose for his 
doctoral dissertation: “The Difference Between the Natural 
Philosophy of Democritus and of Epicurus.” 

In this study he favored the materialism of Epi- 
curus because it allowed for an energizing principle in 
matter. He thought that if matter were auto-dynamic it 
would do away with the need for a Creator, a designer or a 
governing force in the universe. The anti-religious senti- 
ments of Marx found further expression in his thesis when he 
chose for its motto the cry of Prometheus: “In one word — 
I hate all the gods !” During this period of intellectual incuba- 
tion three things dominated the thinking of Karl Marx: his 
desire to discover a philosophy of nature; his desire to com- 
pletely repudiate all forms of religion; his desire to win the 
hand of the daughter of Baron von Westphalen. 

While Marx was at the University of Berlin he fell in 
with a left-wing school of Hegelians who were followers of 
the German philosopher, Georg Wilhelm Hegel. At the mo- 
ment their whole energy was consumed by a desire to liqui- 
date Christianity. David Friedrich Strauss had published his 
Life of Jesus in 1835 and shocked all Germany with his 
contention that the Gospels were not true historical documents 
but were merely myths which he believed evolved from the 
communal imagination of early Christians. A close associate 
of Marx, Bruno Bauer, wrote on the same theme in 1840 under 
the title. Historical Criticism of the Synoptic Gospels. In 
this book he claimed the Gospels were forgeries. He said 
Jesus had never existed, that he was a figure of fiction and 
therefore Christianity was a fraud. 

At this point Bauer and Marx decided they would boldly 
publish a Journal of Atheism, but the magazine lacked financial 
sponsorship and died in gestation. 

Nevertheless, the anti Christian campaign gained anoth- 
er eloquent protagonist named Ludwig Feuerbach who came 
out in 1841 with his Essence of Christianity. He not only 
ridiculed Christianity but presented the thesis that man is 
the highest form of intelligence in the entire universe. This 


The Founders of Communism 


exotic flash of speculation fascinated Marx. He had written 
the same idea into his thesis for a doctorate. Marx had 
bluntly said it is necessary “to recognize as the highest di- 
vinity, the human self-consciousness itself !” 

The government’s reaction to this anti-Christian cam- 
paign took a serious turn, therefore Marx decided it would 
not be prudent to present his thesis to the University of Berlin 
where he had been studying. His friend, Bruno Bauer, sug- 
gested that he go to the University of Jena. Marx followed 
this suggestion and consequently received his degree of Doc- 
tor of Philosophy from that institution in April, 1841. 

Shortly afterwards, however, a leveling blow wiped out 
his passionate ambition to become a professor of philosophy 
at some German university. This resulted from the fact that 
Marx collaborated with Bauer in writing a pamphlet which 
was vigorously investigated because of its revolutionary 
flavor. When the Prussian officials identified the authors, 
Bauer was summarily dismissed from the University of Bonn 
and Marx was assured that he would never be allowed to 
teach at any university in Germany. 

Now the revolutionary spirit flamed high in Marx; 
somehow he must start a movement to remake the world. 
However, to succeed in such a task he felt he must have the 
companionship of Jenny von Westphalen, the attractive 
and popular daughter of a German aristocrat who lived 
in Marx’s hometown. For seven years he had corre- 
sponded with her. One of his letters made it clear that if she 
married him she would become the wife of a revolutionary. 
Said he: “Jenny ! If we can but weld our souls together, then 
with contempt shall I fling my glove in the world's face, then 
shall I stride through the wreckage a creator !” 3 

In June, 1843, the wedding took place. At the time the 
bridegroom was unemployed and Jenny von Westphalen soon 
discovered that this was to be a permanent characteristic of 
their entire married life. Karl Marx never acquired the 
slightest comprehension of the responsibilties which a hus- 


3 Wilson, Edmund, “to the Finland station,” p. 115. 


The Maked Communist 


band assumes as the head of a family. Nevertheless, Jenny 
von Westphalen remained loyal and devoted to Karl Marx 
under circumstances which would have crushed a woman of 
weaker mettle. After the marriage they had a five month 
honeymoon following which they went to Paris, where Marx 
hoped to collaborate in publishing a revolutionary organ called 
The Franco-German Year Books. The publication collapsed 
after its first issue and Marx spent the next fifteen months 
in the pleasant task of “studying and writing.” 

This was to be the pattern of his whole life. In later years 
while his family was starving he could be found at the library 
devoting himself to the interesting but, for him, completely 
unremunerative study of higher mathematics. Voltaire re- 
ferred derisively to the breed of men who cannot run their 
own families and therefore retreat to their attics so that from 
there they can run the whole world. Marx seemed to fit this 
pattern. Although he seemed physically indolent, Marx was 
actually capable of prodigious quantities of intellectual work 
if it dealt with a subject which interested him. Otherwise, he 
would not stir. As a result of these personal characteristics, 
Marx never did acquire a profession, an office, a regular oc- 
cupation or a dependable means of livelihood. Concerning this 
phase of his career a friendly biographer states : 

“Regular work bored him, conventional occupation put 
him out of humor. Without a penny in his pocket, and with 
his shirt pawned, he surveyed the world with a lordly air. 
. . . Throughout his life he was hard up. He was ridiculously 
ineffectual in his endeavors to cope with the economic needs of 
his household and family; and his incapacity in monetary 
matters involved him in an endless series of struggles and 
catastrophies. He was always in debt; was incessantly being 
dunned by creditors. . . . Half his household goods were al- 
ways at the pawnshop. His budget defied all attempts to set 
it in order. His bankruptcy was chronic. The thousands upon 
thousands which Engels handed over to him melted away in 
his fingers like snow .” 4 


4 Ruhle, Otto, “kari, marx,” pp. 383-381,. 


The Founders of Communism 


This brings us to the only close friend Karl Marx ever 
had — Friedrich Engels. 

Friedrich Engels 

In many ways Engels was the very opposite of Karl 
Marx. He was tall, slender, vivacious and good natured. He 
enjoyed athletics, liked people and was by nature an opti- 
mist. He was born in Barmen, Germany, November 28, 1820, 
the son of a textile manufacturer who owned large factories 
both in Barmen, Germany, and in Manchester, England. 
From his earliest youth Engels chafed under the iron disci- 
pline of his father, and he learned to despise the textile fac- 
tories and all they represented. As he matured it was natural 
that he should have lined himself up with the “industrial pro- 
letariat.” 

For the son of a bourgeois businessman, young Engels 
had a surprisingly limited education; at least it did not in- 
clude any extensive university training. But what he lacked 
in formal training he supplied through hard work and na- 
tive talent. He spent considerable time in England and 
learned both English and French with such facility that he 
succeeded in selling articles to liberal magazines of both 
languages. 

Biographers have emphasized that while the hearty and 
attractive Engels differed in personal traits from the brood- 
ing, suspicious Marx, nevertheless, the two of them followed 
an identical course of intellectual development. Engels, like 
Marx, quarreled bitterly with his father, took to reading 
Strauss’s Life of Jesus, fell in with the same radical left- 
wing Hegelians who had attracted Marx, became an agnostic 
and a cynic, lost confidence in the free-enterprise economy of 
the Industrial Revolution and decided the only real hope for 
the world was Communism. 

Engels had been an admirer of Marx long before he had 
a chance to meet him. It was in August, 1844, that he traveled 
to Paris for the specific purpose of visiting Marx. The mag- 


The Naked Communist 


netic attraction between the two men was instantaneous. 
After ten days both men felt it was their destiny to work to- 
gether. It was during this same ten days that Marx con- 
verted Engels from a Utopian Communist to an outright 
revolutionist. He convinced Engels that there was no real 
hope for humanity in the idealism of Robert Owen or Saint- 
Simon but that conditions called for a militant revolution to 
overthrow existing society. Engels agreed and proceeded 
back to Germany. 

Six months later Marx was expelled from France, along 
with other revolutionary spirits, and took up residence in 
Brussels, Belgium. Here Marx and Engels wrote The 
Holy Family, a book designed to rally around them those 
Communists who were willing to completely disavow any 
connection with the so-called “peaceful reforms” of phil- 
anthropy, Utopianism or Christian morality. The red flag 
of revolution was up and Marx and Engels considered them- 
selves the royal color-guard. 

The strange relationship which rapidly developed 
between Marx and Engels can be understood only when it is 
realized that Engels considered it a privilege to be associated 
with such a genius as Marx. Among other things, he counted 
it an honor to be allowed to assume responsibility for Marx’s 
financial support. Shortly after Marx was expelled from 
France, Engels sent him all the ready cash in his possession 
and promised him more : “Please take it as a matter of 
course that it will be the greatest pleasure in the world to 
place at your disposal the fee I hope shortly to receive for 
my English literary venture. I can get along without any 
money just now, for my governor (father) will have to keep 
me in funds. We cannot allow the dogs to enjoy having in- 
volved you in pecuniary embarrassment by their infamous be- 
havior.” 

This new partnership between Marx and Engels gave 
them both the courage to immediately launch an International 
Communist League based on the need for a violent revolution. 
They planned to use the workers in Germany and France as 
the backbone for their new political machine but this proved 


The Founders off Communism 


bitterly disappointing. After spending several months 
among the French workers Engels castigated them because 
they “prefer the most preposterous day-dreaming, peaceful 
plans for inaugurating universal happiness.” He told Marx 
that the tinder for a revolution in France was nonexistent. 
Having thus failed in their plan to build their own revolu- 
tionary organization, Marx and Engels decided to take over 
one that was already in existence. In August, 1847, they suc- 
ceeded in gaining control of the “Workers’ Educational So- 
ciety” in Brussels. This immediately gave them prestige 
among reform organizations in Europe. It also gave them 
the first opportunity to extend their influence in England. 
At this point Marx and Engels would have been surprised to 
know that England rather than the Continent would become 
the headquarters for their revolutionary work. 

The Communist Manifesto 

During November, 1847, word came from London 
that the “Federation of the Just” (later known as the Com- 
munist League) wanted Marx and Engels to participate in 
their second congress as representatives of the Communist 
organizations in Brussels. Marx and Engels not only at- 
tended the congress but practically took it over. By staying up 
most of the night laying their plans and by using shrewd 
strategy at each of the meetings, they succeeded in getting the 
congress to adopt all of their basic views. Marx and Engels 
were then commissioned to write a declaration of principles 
or a “Manifesto to the World.” They returned to Brussels and 
immediately set to work with Marx pouring into the text his 
passionate plea for a revolution. When they were through they 
had announced to mankind that the new program of Interna- 
tional Communism stood for: 1. the overthrow of capitalism, 
2. the abolition of private property, 3. the elimination of the 
family as a social unit, 4. the abolition of all classes, 5. the 
overthrow of all governments, and 6. the establishment of a 
communist order with communal ownership of property in a 


The Naked Communist 


classless, stateless society. To accomplish this, the Communist 
Manifesto was crystal clear as to the course to be taken : 

“In short, the Communists everywhere support every rev- 
olutionary movement against existing social conditions. Let 
the ruling classes tremble at a Communist revolution. The 
proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have 
a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!” 

The Revolution of 181*8 

The red glare of revolution came much sooner than 
either Marx or Engels had anticipated. In February, 1848, 
while the ink on the Communist Manifesto was still drying, 
the revolutionary spirit of the French proletariat united with 
the resentment of the bourgeoisie against Louis Philippe and 
a violent uprising ensued which drove the Emperor from the 
country. Immediately afterwards a provisional government 
was set up which included members of the Communist 
League, who promptly summoned Marx to Paris. Marx 
was flushed with excitement when he arrived at the French 
capitol armed with full authority from the Communist League 
headquarters to set up the international headquarters in Paris 
and to engineer the revolutions in other countries from there. 

Marx learned that the intoxicating success of the uprising 
in France had induced the radical element in the provisional 
government to send “legions” into surrounding countries. 
Their purpose was to launch an uprising in each country and 
build the revolution into one magnificent conflagration. Al- 
though this was precisely what Marx had been advocating for 
several years, he suddenly sensed that such a campaign at the 
present moment might backfire and cause them to lose the 
support of the masses in those countries where legions were 
sent. Nevertheless, the plan was adopted and the first legions 
were marched off to Germany. Marx soon followed and be- 
gan publishing a revolutionary periodical in his native tongue 
called the Rheinische Zeitung. 

The revolutionary leaders soon discovered that Marx was 


The Founders of Communism 


a propaganda liability. This became painfully evident when 
he was sent with other members of the Communist League to 
organize the workers in the Rhine Valley. Marx, when asked 
to address the German Democratic Congress, badly bungled 
this golden opportunity. Carl Schurz says: “I was eager to 
hear the words of wisdom that would, I supposed, fall from 
the lips of so celebrated a man. I was greatly disappointed. 
What Marx said was unquestionably weighty, logical and 
clear. But never have I seen any one whose manner was more 
insufferably arrogant. He would not give me a moment’s con- 
sideration to any opinion that differed from his own. He 
treated with open contempt everyone who contradicted him. . . . 
Those whose feelings he had wounded by his offensive manner 
were inclined to vote in favor of everything which ran counter 
to his wishes . . . far from winning new adherents, he repelled 
many who might have been inclined to support him.” 3 

From the beginning the revolution in Germany had been 
anemic and by May 16, 1849, it had reached a state of in- 
glorious collapse. Marx was given twenty-four hours to quit 
the country. He stayed just long enough to borrow funds and 
print the last edition of his paper in red ink and then hastened 
away to find refuge in France. 

But France was no refuge. Marx arrived in Paris penni- 
less and exhausted, only to find that the Communist influence 
in the new Republic had wilted and died. The National As- 
sembly was in the hands of a monarchial majority. 

As soon as possible he fled from France, leaving his family 
to follow later because he was destitute of funds. He decided 
to make his permanent exile in London. 


The End of the Communist League 

Although Marx had to cram his family into a cheap, one- 
room apartment in the slums of London, he felt sufficiently 


i Ruble, Otto, “karl marx,” pp. 157-158. 


The Naked Communist 


20 satisfied with their well-being to immediately concentrate his 
attention once again on the task of reviving the fires of the 
revolution. In spite of this spirit of dedication, however, 
Marx’s effort to lead out did more harm than good. His 
agitating spirit always seemed to create splinters and quarrels 
in the ranks of his confederates and before long he had prac- 
tically cut himself off from his former associates. The Cen- 
tral Committee was taken out from under his influence and 
transferred to Cologne. There it remained until 1852 when 
all Communist leaders in Germany were arrested and sen- 
tenced to heavy prison terms for revolutionary activity. Marx 
did everything in his power to save his estranged comrades. 
He gathered documents, recruited witnesses and proposed 
various legal arguments which he thought might help, but 
in spite of all this yeoman service the verdicts of “guilty” 
pulled out of active revolutionary service every one of the 
party leaders then on trial. This sounded the death knell for 
the Communist League. 

The Family of Karl Marx 


From this time on the Marx family lived in London in 
the most extreme poverty. A peculiar combination of emo- 
tions was expressed by Marx in his correspondence during 
this period. On the one hand he expressed soulful concern 
for the welfare of his wife and children. He confessed in a 
letter to Engels that the “nocturnal tears and lamentations” 
of his wife were almost beyond endurance. Then, in the same 
letter he blithely went about explaining how he was spending 
his whole time studying history, politics, economics and social 
problems so as to figure out the answers for all the problems 
of the world. 

In 1852 his little daughter, Francisca, died. Two years 
later marked the passing of his young son, Edgar, and two 
years after that a baby died at birth. 

A few paragraphs from a letter written by Mrs. Marx 
indicates the amazing loyalty of this woman who saw her half- 


The Founders of Communism 


fed children dying around her while their father spent days 
and nights in the British Museum library. 

“Let me describe only one day of this life, as it actually 
was. . . . Since wet-nurses are exceedingly expensive here, I 
made up my mind, despite terrible pains in the breasts and the 
back, to nurse the baby myself. But the poor little angel 
drank in so much sorrow with the milk that he was continually 
fretting, in violent pain day and night. Since he has been in 
the world, he has not slept a single night through, at most 
two or three hours. Of late, there have been violent spasms, 
so that the child is continually betwixt life and death. When 
thus afflicted, he sucked so vigorously that my nipple became 
sore, and bled ; often the blood streamed into his little mouth. 
One day I was sitting like this when our landlady suddenly 
appeared. . . . Since we could not pay this sum (of five pounds) 
instantly, two brokers came into the house, and took posses- 
sion of all my belongings — bedding, clothes, everything, even 
the baby’s cradle and the little girls’ toys, so that the children 
wept bitterly. They threatened to take everything away in 
two hours. (Fortunately they did not.) If this had happened 
I should have had to lie on the floor with my freezing children 
beside me. . . . 

“Next day we had to leave. It was cold and rainy. My 
husband tried to find lodging, but as soon as he said he had 
four children no one would take us. At length a friend helped 
us. We paid what was owing, and I quickly sold all my beds 
and bedding in order to settle accounts with the chemist, the 
baker, and the milkman. 

Thus the years passed. Literally hundreds of letters were 
exchanged between Engels and Marx and nearly all of them 
refer in one place or another to money. Engels’ letters char- 
acteristically contain this phrase: “Enclosed is a post office 
order for five pounds,” while Marx’s epistles are shot through 
with exasperated passages such as : “My mother has positively 
assured me that she will protest any bill drawn on her.” 
“For ten days we have been without a sou in the house.” 


“ Richie, Otto, “KARL MARX,” pp. 202-204. 


The Naked Communist 


“You will agree that I am dipped up to my ears in petty- 
bourgeois pickle.” 

At one point in this bitter existence there seemed to be 
a sudden ray of hope. During a particularly desperate period 
when Engels could give no relief, Marx made a trip to Hol- 
land where a prosperous uncle generously handed him one hun- 
dred and sixty pounds. This was enough to put Marx on his 
financial feet, pay off his debts and give him a new start. But 
with money in his pocket, Marx decided to take a tour of Ger- 
many. He visited his mother in Treves, proceeded to Ber- 
lin, undertook a number of drinking excursions with his old 
friends, had himself photographed and generally played the 
role of a gentleman of leisure. Two months later he returned 
home. Frau Marx welcomed her tourist husband thinking 
that now bills could be paid, clothing and furniture could be 
purchased and better rooms rented. She was horrified to 
learn that practically nothing remained of the hundred and 
sixty pounds. 

The Founding of the First International 

In 1862 a great international exhibition was held in Lon- 
don to proudly parade the industrial achievements of nine- 
teenth century capitalism. The promoters of the exhibition 
were desirous of creating an atmosphere of international good 
will and therefore invited all countries to not only submit dis- 
plays but also to send representatives of their workers to 
exchange ideas and good will with the workers of other 
countries who would be in attendance. 

The British labor leaders, who had been gaining strength 
since 1860, considered this an excellent time to set up an inter- 
national workers’ organization. They therefore took every 
opportunity to make firm friends with labor leaders from 
Italy, Germany, France, Poland and Holland. In due time 
they were able to establish a permanent “International” with 
headquarters in London. One of the leaders of this move- 
ment was a tailor named Eccarius who had formerly been a 


The Founders of Communism 


right hand man to Marx during the days of the Communist 
League. As soon as the new movement began to catch on, 
Marx was invited by Eccarius to participate. 

Immediately Marx began to assert himself — but within 
bounds. This was the lesson he had partially learned from 
the failure of the Communist League. The new organization 
was called the International Workingmen’s Association and 
is frequently referred to as the First International. As long 
as Marx restrained himself he was able to exercise consider- 
able influence among the labor leaders from the various coun- 
tries. By careful maneuvering behind the scenes he was able 
to get nearly all of his ideas adopted in preference to weaker, 
more peaceful programs suggested by “social-minded reform- 
ers.” But all of this seemed mealy-mouthed and unnatural 
to Marx. He admitted to Engels he had been forced to make 
compromises in order to keep peace : 

“My proposals were all adopted by the sub-committee. 
Only one thing, I had to pledge myself to insert in the pre- 
amble to the rules two phrases about ‘duty’ and ‘right’ ; also 
about truth, morality and justice — but they are all so placed 
that they cannot do any harm. ... It will be some time before 
the reawakened movement will permit the old boldness of 
speech. We must be strong in the substance, but moderate in 
the form.” 7 

In spite of this determination to be “moderate,” how- 
ever, it was not long before the true feeling of Marx rumbled 
to the surface. He was concerned about two things: first, 
the need to create a hard core of disciplined revolutionists who 
could inflame the workers of the major industries in all coun- 
tries with a will to act, and secondly, the need to eliminate any 
who might threaten Marx’s leadership in this new movement. 
What Marx was contemplating was a party purge. 

The first to feel the force of the new campaign was 
the German labor leader, Herr von Schweitzer. All students 
of Marx and Engels seem to agree that both of them were 
completely without mercy when it came to dealing with a 


7 Ruhle, Otto, “karl marx,” pp. 248-2i9. 


The Naked Communist 


comrade who was marked for party liquidation. The broad- 
side of propaganda which they launched against Schweitzer 
alleged that he was working for Bismarck, the Iron Man of 
Germany. Although this was pure fabrication, nothing would 
have been more devastating to Schweitzer’s reputation. Even 
today some historians use Marx’s charges as a basis for the 
claim that Schweitzer was a traitor to the cause of labor. 

Another party pillar to fall under the purge was 
Mikhail Bakunin, the first Russian to become interested 
in revolutionary activities. He escaped from a Russian 
prison and had taken up residence in Geneva. Bakunin be- 
came so enthusiastic in advocating Marx’s principles that 
certain elements of the labor movement began gravitating to- 
ward his leadership. This was fatal. Marx immediately 
set out to destroy him. The technique was the same as that 
used against Schweitzer except that Marx and Engels charged 
Bakunin with being an agent of the Russian Czar. This had 
a ruinous effect for awhile. Then they spread a charge which 
later proved to be completely false — that Bakunin had embez- 
zled 25,000 francs. Finally, to administer the coup de grace, 
Marx succeeded in getting the International to oust Bakunin 
from the Association. By this act Marx secretly felt he had 
destroyed the last man who might seriously threaten his 
leadership. What Marx did not know was the fact that in 
spite of this abuse, Bakunin would remain loyal to Marx’s 
precepts, even translate Marx’s books into Russian and thereby 
plant seeds which would ultimately bring the first nation in 
the modern world under a Communist dictatorship. 

However, Mark’s anxiety to purge the International of all 
his personal enemies created such violent suspicion, distrust 
and party dissension that it brought about the organization’s 
total destruction. In fact, the end of the First International 
came close on the heels of Bakunin’s expulsion. The trade 
unions in England began to abandon the cause of international 
revolution and the workers’ groups on the Continent began 
ignoring the mandates of the Association. Finally, on Septem- 
ber 8, 1873, the last congress of the International Working- 
men’s Association was held at Geneva and Marx found that 


The Founders off Communism 


the thirteen delegates who finally agreed to attend had to be 
practically “dug up out of the ground.” For all practical 
intents and purpose, the First International was dead. 


Marx Writes a Book to Change the World 


Much of Marx’s motivation in trying to make the Inter- 
national Workingmen’s Association a great world movement 
was his desire to put into practice the very theories he was 
struggling to put down on paper. For several years he had 
pampered his two pet projects — the International and his 
“book.” Both projects drained him of his normal physical 
strength. This permitted an old liver ailment to flare up again 
and before long he was suffering from a rash of boils which 
threatened to cover his entire body. Ill health was to plague 
him the remainder of his days. In a letter to Engels he poured 
out his complaints against the pain and disappointment he was 
suffering : 

“To my extreme disgust, after being unable to sleep all 
night I discovered two more first-class boils on my chest.” 
Later he wrote, “I am working now like a drayhorse, seeing 
that I must make the best use of all the time available for 
work, and the carbuncles are still there, though they are now 
giving me only local trouble, and are not interfering with my 
brain.” After a particularly severe attack he wrote: “This 
time it was really serious — the family did not know how 
serious. If it recurs three or four times more, it will be all 
up with me. I have wasted amazingly, and am still damnably 
weak, not in the head, but in the trunk and limbs. . . . There 
is no question of being able to sit up, but, while lying, I have 
been able, at intervals, to keep digging away at my work.”" 

The “work” to which Marx refers was the research and 
preparation of the first volume of Capital. Marx was con- 
vinced that a revolution would never succeed unless the work- 
ing masses had a revolutionary philosophy of history, 

s RuMe, Otto, "KARL MARX,” p. 2112. 


The Naked Communist 


26 


economics and social progress. He wrote Capital in order 
to show why the violent overthrow of the present order was 
not only justified but inescapable. Elsewhere, we shall 
examine the theories of Marx, but at this point it is sufficient 
to point out that Marx looked upon the writing of this book as 
an unpleasant mission which had to be completed before in- 
ternational communism could germinate and flourish. 

During 1865, when Marx was striving to prepare a final 
copy of his first volume for the printer, he told Engels he 
wanted to “finish it off quickly, for the thing has become a 
perfect nightmare to me.” He occasionally enjoyed periods 
of respite from his illness and finally wrote to Engels: “As 
regards the damned book, this is how the matter stands. It 
was finished in the end of December.” Engels assured Marx 
that the pain and suspense of getting the book completed were 
as great a trial to him as they were to Marx. He wrote : “The 
day the manuscript goes to press, I shall get gloriously 
drunk!” 

It was not until March, 1867, that all the revisions were 
finally completed and Marx set out for Germany to have the 
book published in his native tongue. In a short time it began 
to be distributed. 

But when Capital appeared in the book stalls it was far 
from the literary triumph which Marx and Engels had both 
expected. Its line of reasoning was entirely too finely drawn 
for the working masses and far from persuasive among in- 
tellectual reformers. It remained for the intellectuals of an- 
other generation to make Capital the principal excuse for 
their attack on the existing order of things. 


The Closing Years 

By 1875 Marx had little satisfaction to draw from his life 
of struggle. The International had disintegrated around him 
and the book which was written to justify his policies was 
gathering dust in the bookstores across the Continent. Marx 
continued writing two more volumes but the flame was 


The Founders of Communism 


going out in him. After Marx’s death, it would remain the 
task of Engels to publish the second volume in 1885 and the 
third volume in 1894. 

The closing years for Karl Marx were sterile, lonely 
ones. In abject defeat he turned to the bosom of his family. 
Always there would be Jenny to give comfort and consolation. 
But the Marx children bore the scars of their upbringing. 
When Marx interfered with the courtship of his daughter, 
Eleanor, she entered a free-love union with Edward Aveling 
and, following a most wretched existence with him, commit- 
ted suicide. Another daughter, Laura, married a renegade 
doctor and later died with him in a suicide pact. 

By 1878 Marx had abandoned practically every aspect of 
his work. His rock-ribbed self confidence had been shattered. 
Labor leaders ignored him, reformers ridiculed him. His 
words carried little weight, either at home or abroad. 

Thus, his morale was at the breaking point when the toll 
of time struck down his only kindred spirit outside of Engels 
— Frau Marx. This gentle, aristocratic and long-suffer- 
ing companion died of cancer December 2, 1881. Thirteen 
months later, Marx’s favorite daughter, Jenny, also suddenly 
died. Thereafter, Engels noted that Marx, the man, was 
as well as dead. He survived his daughter, Jenny, by only 
two brief months. On March 14, 1883, at 2 :45 in the afternoon, 
he died while sitting alone in his chair. 

Three days later six or seven persons followed the casket 
of Karl Marx to Highgate cemetery in London and there his 
one abiding friend, Friedrich Engels, read a funeral oration. 
It was the kind of oration Marx would liked to have heard. 
It granted him in death what Marx was never granted in life 
— an unequivocal tribute of glowing praise. 

Epilogue 

Thus ended the dynamic, turbulent and restless career of 
Karl Marx. By all standards it was a pathetic life, filled with 
burning ambition, constant frustration and continuous 




The Naked Communist 

28 failure. Whether seen from the viewpoint of friend or foe, 
perhaps the real tragedy of Marx’s life can be found in the 
fact that for some amazing reason he almost instinctively 
planted the seeds of self-destruction in any project he pro- 
moted. 

One cannot pore over the almost endless products of his 
pen — the weighty, complex books or the reams of sniping, 
feverish correspondence without feeling that Karl Marx 
projected into Communism the very essence of his own nature. 
His resentment of political authority expressed itself in a 
ringing cry for universal revolution. His refusal or inability 
to compete in a capitalistic economy wrung from him a vitriolic 
denunciation of that economy and a prophecy that its destruc- 
tion was inexorably decreed. His deep sense of insecurity 
pushed him to create out of his own imagination a device for 
interpreting history which made progress inescapable and a 
Communist millennium unavoidable. His personal attitude 
toward religion, morals and competition in everyday exist- 
ence led him to long for an age when men would have no 
religion, morals or competition in everyday existence. He 
wanted to live in a classless, stateless, noncompetitive society 
where there would be such lavish production of everything 
that men, by simply producing according to their apparent 
ability, would automatically receive a superabundance of all 
material needs. 

Another characteristic of Marx which he shared with 
his intellectual off-spring — Communism — is that both must 
be viewed from a distance to be admired, even by friends. 
It is for this reason that biographers often treat Marx as 
though he were two persons. From a distance they might 
feel to admire his theories but upon close contact Marx be- 
comes a different entity. Thus, Bakunin could call Marx the 
“supreme economic and socialist genius of our day” and then 
give the following evaluation of Marx, the man : 

“Marx is egotistical to the pitch of insanity. . . . 

“Marx loved his own person much more than he loved his 
friends and apostles, and no friendship could hold water 
against the slightest wound to his vanity. . . . Marx will never 


The Founders of Communism 


forgive a slight to his person. You must worship him, make 
an idol of him, if he is to love you in return ; you must at 
least fear him if he is to tolerate you. He likes to surround 
himself with pygmies, with lackeys and flatterers. All the 
same, there are some remarkable men among his intimates. 
In general, however, one may say that in the circle of Marx’s 
intimates there is very little brotherly frankness, but a great 
deal of machination and diplomacy. There is a sort of tacit 
struggle, and a compromise between the self-loves of the vari- 
ous persons concerned; and where vanity is at work there is 
no longer place for brotherly feeling. Every one is on his 
guard, is afraid of being sacrificed, of being annihilated. 
Marx’s circle is a sort of mutual admiration society. Marx is 
the chief distributor of honours, but is also the invariably 
perfidious and malicious, the never frank and open, inciter to 
the persecution of those whom he suspects, or who had the 
misfortune of failing to show all the veneration he expects. 
As soon as he has ordered a persecution there is no limit to the 
baseness and infamy of the method.” 

The acid of boiling intolerance which Marx frequently 
poured down on the heads of his followers may be partially 
explained by his own complete certainty that the theories he 
had concocted were infallible gems of cosmic truth. In his 
heyday of abounding strength Marx often bowled over his 
opposition with mountain-moving declarations of supreme 
self-confidence : 

“Historical evolution is on your side,” he shouted to his 
followers. “Capitalism, brought into being by the laws of 
historical evolution, will be destroyed by the inexorable work- 
ing of these same laws. The bourgeoisie, the business man- 
ager of the capitalist system, appeared on the stage of history 
with that system, and must make its exit when that system 
walks off the stage. You, proletarians, keep capitalism going 
by your labour, and maintain the whole of bourgeois society 
by the fruits of your industry. But socialism will be a neces- 
sary organic outcome of capitalism, the essence of the latter 
being implied in the essence of the former. With the end of 


The Naked Communist 


capitalism, comes the beginning of socialism as a logical con- 
sequence. You proletarians, as a class, being the incorpora- 
tors of the forces and tendencies which will do away with 
capitalism, must necessarily make an end of the borgeoisie. 
You merely need, as a class, to fulfill the evolution which your 
mission calls on you to fulfill. All you need is to will! History 
makes this as easy as possible for you. You need not hatch 
out any new ideas, make any plans, discover a future State. 
You need not ‘dogmatically anticipate the world.’ You need 
merely put your hands to the task which is awaiting you. The 
means by which you will do it are to be found in the unceasing, 
purposive, consistent fighting of the class struggle, whose 
crown will be the victory of the social revolution.” 

When Marx died there was little to suggest to him in his 
closing hours that he yet would be remembered for the thing 
he had striven unsuccessfully to produce — a genuine revolu- 
tion. While Western Europe wrote off revolutionary violence 
as a mere phase of Nineteenth Century social reform, a great 
slumbering giant in Eastern Europe was about to be rudely 
awakened by Marx’s revolutionary call to arms. This, of 
course, was Russia. 

Before studying the revolution in Russia, we must 
turn to a brief review of the theories which Karl Marx and 
Friedrich Engels left as a legacy to the disciples of World 
Communism. In these theories may be found the explanation 
for many things in the Russian Revolution and in subsequent 
Communist activities which otherwise might be difficult or im- 
possible to understand. 



The Appeal off Communism 


“How could a great scientist or anyone with so much educa- 
tion fall for Communism?” During the past 20 years this 
question has echoed around the land with each fresh exposure 
of Red espionage. It has been amazing to many people to 
discover that Communism appeals to certain educated individ- 
uals because it includes an intriguing “philosophy of nature.” 
In this philosophy Communism does seem to explain the origin 
and development of everything in existence — life, planets, 
galaxies, evolution, even human intelligence. To those who 
have not previously delved into philosophy these concepts 
sometimes prove infatuating and persuasive. Therefore, in 
this chapter we shall deal with them. 

Perhaps this material may prove to be difficult reading. 
However, the theories of Communism will be far easier to 
digest in this brief, concentrated form than they would be if 
the student attempted to spend several months digging them 
out of far-flung, technical treatises in Communist literature. 

Every student should pursue his studies of Marxism until 
he has discovered the answers to such questions* as these: 

What is the Communist “law of opposites”? What is the 
“law of negation”? Explain the “law of transformation.” 




The Naked Communist 


How does the Communist philosopher explain the origin 
of life? Does the universe have a designer or a purpose? 

What is meant by the Communist concept that everything 
is the result of accumulated accident? 

Does Communism have a god? What did Feuerbach say 
man’s god really is? 

Who did Marx say must remake the world? 

How did Marx and Engels justify the use of violence? 

What is the basic fallacy in the Communist “law of op- 
posites”? 

What is the inherent fallacy in the “law of negation”? 

What is the weakness in the “law of transformation”? 

The Case for Communism 

The influence of Marx and Engels has continued in the 
earth, not simply because they were against so many things 
but primarily because they stood for something. In a word, 
they promised to satisfy humanity’s two greatest needs : the 
need for universal peace and the need for universal prosperity. 

The very fact that Communism offered a millennium for 
all the distracted, dissatisfied and unhappy people in the world 
assured it a hearing, not merely by under-privileged workers, 
but by many of the aristocracy, many of the wealthy, and 
many of the political and economic theorists. 

When these people began hearing how Marx and Engels 
were going to achieve universal peace and universal pros- 
perity they began dividing into clear-cut camps for or 
against Communism. One group insisted that Communism 
was worth a try in spite of the blood bath it would bring 
to humanity (after all, what is one more war if it is the 
gateway to permanent peace?). The other camp insisted 
that Communism is a complete repudiation of every decent 
human attribute. It would summarily forfeit all the gains 
which men have made through centuries of struggle. 

What, then, is the case for Communism? 

In this chapter we shall attempt to reduce Communist 


The Appeal of Communism 


thought to its basic formula. The student will become imme- 
diately aware that Marx and Engels dealt with much more 
than violent revolution and Communist economics. In fact, 
they developed a framework of ideas designed to explain every- 
thing in existence. This philosophy is the pride and joy of 
every modern Communist intellectual and therefore deserves 
careful scrutiny. 


The Communist Philosophy of Nature 


To begin with, the basic Communist idea is that every- 
thing in existence can be explained by one thing — matter. 
Beyond matter there is nothing. Matter is the total explana- 
tion for atoms, solar systems, plants, animals, man, psychic 
consciousness, human intelligence and all other aspects of 
life. Communist philosophy maintains that if science can 
get to know all there is to know about matter, we will then 
know all there is to know about everything . 1 Communism has 
therefore assigned to science the monumental task of making 
man totally omniscient — of knowing all truth — but has limited 
the investigation to one reality — matter. Matter is conclu- 
sively accepted as the beginning and the end of all reality. 

Communist philosophy then sets forth to answer three 
questions : 

What is the origin of energy or motion in nature? 

What causes galaxies, solar systems, planets, animals and 
all kingdoms of nature to constantly increase their numerical 
quantity? 

What is the origin of life, the origin of species and the 
origin of consciousness and mind? 

Marx and Engels answered all of these questions with 
their three laws of matter: 

THE LAW of opposites — Marx and Engels started with 
the observation that everything in existence is a combination 


1 Engels, Friedrich, “ludwig Feuerbach,” International Publishers. 
N. Y., 193 A, p. 31. 


The Naked Communist 


or unity of opposites. 2 Electricity is characterized by a posi- 
tive and negative charge. Atoms consist of protons and 
electrons which are unified but contradictory forces. Each 
organic body has qualities of attraction and repulsion. Even 
human beings find through introspection that they are a unity 
of opposite qualities— selfishness and altruism, courage and 
cowardice, social traits and anti-social traits, humbleness and 
pride, masculinity and femininity. The Communist conclusion 
is that everything in existence “contains two mutually in- 
compatible and exclusive but nevertheless equally essential 
and indispensable parts or aspects.” 3 

Now the Communist concept is that this unity of opposites 
in nature is the thing which makes each entity auto-dynamic 
and provides the constant motivation for movement and 
change. This idea was borrowed from Georg Wilhelm Hegel 
(1770-1831) who said: “Contradiction (in nature) is the root 

of all motion and of all life.” 4 

This, then, introduces us to the first basic observation of 
Communist dialectics. The word “dialectics” has a very special 
meaning to Communists. It represents the idea of conflict in 
nature. The beginning student of Communist philosophy can 
better understand the meaning of dialectics if he substitutes 
the word “conflict” each time “dialectics” appears. 

So at this point the student is expected to understand 
that each thing in the universe is in a state of motion because 
it is a parcel made up of opposite forces which are struggling 
within it. This brings us to the second law of matter. 

THE LAW OF NEGATION — Having accounted for the origin 
of motion and energy in the universe, the Communist writers 
then set about to account for the tendency in nature to con- 
stantly increase the numerical quantity of all things. They 
decided that each entity tends to negate itself in order to 
reproduce itself in greater quantity. Engels cited the case 
of the barley seed which, in its natural state, germinates and 

2 Conze, E., “dialectical materialism,” London . N.C.L.C. Society 

1936 V . 35 • 

* Conze, E., '“ dialectical materialism,” pp. 51-52; See also Engels, 

Friedrich, “socialism: utopian and scientific, pp. i~-i8. 

* Quoted by V. Adoratsky, “dialectical materialism, pp. 26-27. 


The Appeal of Communism 


out of its own death or negation produces a plant. The plant 
in turn grows to maturity and is itself negated after bearing 
many barley seeds. Thus, all nature is constantly expanding 
through dying. The elements of opposition which produce 
conflict in each thing and give it motion also tend to negate 
the thing itself ; but out of this dynamic process of dying the 
energy is released to expand and produce many more entities 
of the same kind . 5 6 

Having accounted for numerical increase in the universe, 
the Communist philosophers then set about to account for all 
the different creations in nature. 

THE LAW of transformation — This law states that a 
continuous quantitative development by a particular class often 
results in a “leap” in nature whereby a completely new form 
or entity is produced . 15 Consider, for example, the case of the 
paraffin hydrocarbons: 

“Chemistry testifies to the fact that methane is composed 
of one atom of carbon and four atoms of hydrogen. Now, if 
we add to methane another atom of carbon and two more atoms 
of hydrogen ( a mere quantitative increase since these are the 
elements already composing the methane) we get an entirely 
new chemical substance called ethane. If we add another atom 
of carbon and two more atoms of hydrogen to the ethane, we 
get propane, an entirely different chemical substance. Another 
quantitative addition of an atom of carbon and two atoms of 
hydrogen results in a fourth chemical substance, butane. And 
still another quantitative addition of an atom of carbon and 
two more atoms of hydrogen results in a fifth chemical sub- 
stance, pentane .” 7 

The Marxist philosophers immediately concluded that this 
is the clue to the “Creative Power” in nature. Matter is not 
only auto-dynamic and inclined to increase itself numerically, 
but through quantitative accumulations it is also inherently 
capable of “leaps” to new forms and new levels of reality. 

5 Engels, Friedrich, “anti-duhring,” p. 138. 

6 Engels, Friedrich, “anti-duhring,” p. 11, 5. 

7 McFadden, Charles J., “the philosophy of communism,” p. 50; see 

also C. Porter, “the carbon compounds,” p. 10. 


The Naked Communist 


Marx and Engels now felt they had not only found an explana- 
tion for the “origin of species,” but that they had discovered 
a thrilling explanation for the greatest mystery of all : What 
is Life? 

The Origin of Life, Consciousness and Mind 

On the basis of this principle the Communist philosophers 
decided that the phenomenon of life was the product of one 
of these leaps. Engels stated that the complex chemical struc- 
ture of matter evolved until albuminous substance was formed, 
and from this albuminous substance life emerged. In fact, 
he insisted that just as you cannot have matter without motion, 
so also you cannot have albumin without life. It is an inherent 
characteristic of albumin — a higher form of motion in natures 

Engels also suggested that as soon as life emerged spon- 
taneously from albuminous substance, it was bound to increase 
in complexity. Dialectical Materialism is an evolutionary 
philosophy. However, the Communist does not believe that 
new forms in nature are the result of gradual change but that 
quantitative multiplication builds up the momentum for a 
“leap” in nature which produces a change or a new specie. 

The Communist believes that incidental to one of these 
leaps, the phenomenon of consciousness emerged. The crea- 
ture became aware of the forces which were playing upon it. 
Then at an even higher level another form of life appeared 
with the emerging capacity to work with these impressions — 
to arrange them in associations — and thus mind emerged as 
an intelligent, self-knowing, self-determining quality in mat- 
ter. However, matter is primary, mind is secondary. Where 
there is no matter there is no mind — therefore, there can be 
no soul, no immortality, no God. 

With the setting down of the Law of Transformation the 
Communist philosophy of nature became complete. The 
Dialectical Materialists felt that a great intellectual contribu- 
tion had been made to man’s understanding of the universe. 

' Engels, Friedrich, “anti-duhring,” pp. 78, 85. 


The Appeal of Communism 


Through these laws they decided they had shown : 1. Matter is 
a unity of opposites which creates a conflict that makes it auto- 
dynamic and self-energizing ; therefore matter does not need 
an outside source of power for its manifestation of motion ; 
2. Through its pattern of constant negation or dying, nature 
tends to multiply itself and fill the universe with an orderly 
development or increase without requiring any guiding intelli- 
gence ; and 3. Through the Law of Transformation matter is 
capable of producing new’ forms without the need of any crea- 
tive or directing power outside of itself. 

Engels boasted that by discovery of these laws “the last 
vestige of a Creator external to the world is obliterated.” 1 ' 

From this brief summary, it will be seen that the Com- 
munist intellectual believes that everything in existence came 
about as a result of ceaseless motion among the forces of na- 
ture. Everything is a product of accumulated accident. There 
is no design. There is no law. There is no God. There is 
only matter and force in nature. 

As for man, the Communist philosopher teaches that he 
is a graduate animal — an accident of nature like all other 
forms of life. Nevertheless, man is supposed to have the acci- 
dental good fortune to possess the highest intelligence in exist- 
ence. This is said to make him the real god of the universe. 
This is precisely what Ludwig Feuerbach had in mind when 
he said : “The turning point of history will be the moment man 
becomes aware that the only God of man is man himself.” 

This will account for the almost passionate zeal of Com- 
munist leaders to destroy all forms of religion and the worship 

of God. Nicholai Lenin declared : “We must combat religion 

this is the ABC of materialism, and consequently of Marxism.” 
When Karl Marx was asked what his objective in life was, he 
said, “To dethrone God and destroy capitalism !” However, it 
is interesting to observe that having denounced God, the scrip- 
tures, morals, immortality, eternal judgment, the existence 
of the spirit and the sanctity of individual human life, the 
dialectical materialists turned to the worship of themselves. 


" Engelx, Friedrich, “anti-di'hring,” />. IS . 


The Naked Communis! 


They decided that man is the epitome of perfection among 
nature’s achievements and therefore the center of the universe. 

But if man is supposed to have the highest intelligence 
in existence then it becomes his manifest duty to remake the 
world. Naturally, Marx believed this task was the inescap- 
able responsibility of the Communist leaders since they are 
the only ones who have a truly scientific understanding of so- 
cial and economic progress. Marx and Engels accepted the 
fact that the remaking of the world will have to be a cruel 
and ruthless task and that it will involve the destruction of 
all who stand in the way. This is necessary, they said, in 
order to permit the Communist leadership to wipe out the 
social and economic sins of human imperfection in one clean 
sweep and then gradually introduce a society of perfect har- 
mony which will allow all humanity to live scientifically, se- 
curely and happily during all future ages. 

However, before striking out on such a bold course, the 
founders of Communism realized they would have to develop 
a whole new approach to morals and ethics for their followers. 
Lenin summarized it as follows: “We say that our morality 
is wholly subordinated to the interests of the class struggle 
of the proletariat .” 10 In other words, whatever tends to bring 
about the Communist concept of material betterment is morally 
good, whatever does not is morally bad. This concept is simply 
intended to say that “the end justifies the means.” It is not 
wrong to cheat, lie, violate oaths or even destroy human life 
if it is for a good cause. This code of no morals accounts for 
the amoral behavior on the part of Communists which is fre- 
quently 'incomprehensible to non-Communists. 

A Brief Critique of the 
Communist Philosophy of Nature 

From experience it has been observed that a newly con- 
verted Communist frequently acquires a feeling of omniscient 


10 Levin, V. I., “religion,” p. U7. 


The Appeal of Communism 


superiority over his unconverted fellow men. He feels that 
at last the universe is laid out before him in a simple, com- 
prehensible manner. If he has never wrestled with philo- 
sophical problems before he is likely to be overwhelmed by the 
infatuating possibility that through Dialectical Materialism 
man has finally solved all of the basic problems necessary to 
understand the universe. In this state of mind the student 
will often drop his attitude of critical inquiry. He will invite 
indoctrination in heavy doses because of his complete assur- 
ance that he has at last discovered Truth in its ultimate form. 

There are many things, however, which the alert student 
will immediately recognize as fallacies in the Communist 
philosophy of nature. Take, for example, the Law of Oppo- 
sites. This law proclaims that all matter is a unity of opposites, 
and that out of the opposition manifested by these contradic- 
tory elements, energy is derived. This is supposed to explain 
the origin of motion. But two contradictory elements would 
never come together in the first place unless they already had 
energy in themselves. Contradictory forces in nature are 
found to have energy independent of each other. Bringing 
them together simply unifies energy or motion already in 
existence. Therefore, as philosophical scholars have pointed 
out, the Communist Law of Opposites does not explain motion ; 
it presupposes it !' 1 

As one author facetiously put it: “Two inert elements 
could no more produce a conflict and create motion than a 
thousand dead Capitalists and a million dead Communists could 
produce a class war.” 

It will be recalled that the second law of matter according 
to the Communists is the Law of Negation. This is the prin- 
ciple that the contradictory forces in an entity tend toward 
its own negation but, through the process of dying, these 
forces of motion are released into an even more extended de- 
velopment. Thus, a barley seed germinates and is negated to 
produce a plant which, in turn, is negated to produce a quan- 


11 For an extended discussion of this problem see “the philosophy of 
COMMUNISM,” by Dr. Charles McFadden, pp. 177-lSi. 


The Naked Communist 


tity of new seeds. In this manner the numerical increase in 
nature is accounted for. 

But as Dr. McFadden points out in his Philosophy of 
Communism, the Law of Negation explains nothing. It 
merely describes a phenomenon in nature. True, the plan of 
nature is to reproduce itself in ever-expanding quantities, but 
the demise or negation of a parent is not necessarily related 
in any way to its power to reproduce itself. The growth and 
demise of any being goes forward whether it reproduces itself 
or not, and some beings reproduce over and over again before 
any negation takes place. 

Furthermore, the first and second laws of matter leave 
the Communist philosopher in the position of arguing that 
motion and life are not only auto-dynamic, self-creating and 
spontaneous but that the development of a barley seed into a 
plant and the reproduction of many barley seeds by the plant 
is the result of accumulated accident. Engels deplored the 
possibility of being left in this position and frankly agreed 
that there is “law, order, causality and necessity in nature.” 1 - 
Nevertheless, he would not admit the possibility of intelligent 
design in nature but said the barley seed produces a plant and 
the plant produces more barley seeds because the nature of the 
thing demands it.' '■ Why does the thing demand it? No matter 
how the point is obscured by philosophical terminology, the 
student will have little difficulty detecting that Engels is 
arguing that blind, uncomprehending forces of mechanical 
motion in nature are capable of ordering themselves to produce 
intricate things which are designed in advance to achieve a 
pre-deter mined end. What, for example, is there about a bar- 
ley seed which would demand that it negate itself and produce 
a plant? And by what rule of reason can the Dialectical 
Materialist account for the fact that a germinated barley 
seed always produces a certain kind of plant and nothing else? 

The authorities point out that Engels developed a pattern 
of thought that led to conclusions which even he recognized 

'-Quoted by V. I. Lenin in “MATERIALISM AND EMPIRO-CRITICISM,” 

p. 125. 

i” Engel Friedrich, “ANTI-Dl'HRING,” p. 70. 


The Appeal of Communism 


could not be demonstrated in nature and therefore he retreated 
behind obscure generalities which the student finds nebulous 
and intangible. 

The third law — the Law of Transformation — also de- 
scribes a phenomenon in nature but fails to account for it. 
It confirms that in nature we discover widely separated species 
with distinguishing qualities and characteristics. But while 
some of these “leaps” can be produced with certain inorganic 
substances simply by quantitative accumulation (as in the 
paraffin hydrocarbons) it does not explain how the new 
qualities are produced. Furthermore, when this same princi- 
ple is used to explain life as spontaneously emerging in al- 
buminous substances, the Communist philosopher is defiantly 
flying in the face of all scientific experience. The universal 
demonstration of nature is the fact that only life begets life. 
It has not been possible to produce life synthetically or spon- 
taneously either in the laboratory or in nature. 

These basic weaknesses in Communist philosophy were 
the factors which ultimately convinced Whittaker Chambers 
(an American espionage agent for the Communists) that he 
had been deceived. In spite of the heavy terminology of Com- 
munist dialectics he finally became convinced that blind, un- 
comprehending material forces in nature could never produce 
— regardless of the time allowed — the highly complex things 
which man finds all around him. 

As students of the problem have often pointed out: “The 
odds against nature, of itself happening to produce an organ 
of such complexity as the eye, with its thousands of infini- 
tesimal parts combined in exactly the manner required for 
vision, are mathematically almost incalculable. But the eye 
is only one of the many complex parts of the human body. The 
chances against nature producing precisely that material or- 
ganization found in each of the other organs and glands is 
equally great. But this is not all. For, in man, all of these 
organs and glands are organized into a perfect functional 
unit. And man is only one of the countless species of nature, 
inanimate and animate, each one of which possesses a similar 
marvelous organization of its most minute parts.” 


The Naked Communist 


It was this kind of thinking which finally awakened Whit- 
taker Chambers to the realization that the realities around 
him were much more complex and profound than the Com- 
munist explanation of “motion in matter” could begin to satis- 
fy or account for. Thus, he began his retreat from the 
philosophy of Communism. 

The great tragedy of Communism, however, is the fact 
that its founders did not stop at the so-called “harmless specu- 
lation” of Dialectical Materialism. They determined to per- 
meate every aspect of human existence with the principles 
which they felt they had discovered. Therefore, they promoted 
a new approach to history, economics, politics, ethics, social 
planning and even science. In the Communist Manifesto Marx 
and Engels admitted that critics of Communism could say that 
it “abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all 
morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis ; it there- 
fore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience .” 11 

Because more than a third of the earth’s population is 
now being subjected to the terrifying “plan of action” which 
the Communist founders believed should be forced upon all 
mankind for their ultimate good, we will try to discover how 
Communism proposes to solve the world’s problems. 

"Marx and Engels, “communist manifesto,” Authorized Enqlish 

Translation, p. iO. 



The Communist Approach to the 
Solution of World Problems 

Now we come to the part of Communism with which more 
people are familiar. At least, more people have heard about 
the Communist plan of action than the Communist philosophy 
of nature which we have just covered. Here are some ques- 
tions that every student of Communism should be able to 
answer concerning the Marxist solution to world problems: 

Why did Marx and Engels think they had discovered an 
inexorable law in history which made it possible for them 
to predict the course of future human development? 

What is “Economic Determinism”? What is the “Activist 
Theory”? According to Marx and Engels is there any such 
thing as “free will”? Can men choose the kind of society in 
which they will live or are they victims of material forces 
which surround them? 

How did Marx and Engels explain human progress as a 
product of class struggle? 

What is the Communist theory of private property ? Why 
is it considered a curse? 



The Naked Communist 


How did Marx and Engels account for the origin of the 
State? Why did they think it was “unnatural”? 

How did they account for the origin of religion, morals 
and jurisprudence? 

What was supposed to be accomplished during the Com- 
munist “Dictatorship of the Proletariat”? 

Why do the Communists say “socialism” is only a 
temporary stage of human progress ? 

How did they propose to develop a civilization which 
would consist of a classless, stateless society? 


The Communist Interpretation of History 


Today very few people have had occasion to sit down 
with a professional Communist and listen to his views. 
Should such an occasion arise the student would receive 
the immediate impression that a Communist has a reverential 
regard for the record of man’s past. This is because 
Marx and Engels thought their studies of the past had 
led them to discover an “inexorable law” which runs through 
all history like a bright red thread. They further believed 
that by tracing this thread it is possible to predict with posi- 
tive assurance the pattern of man’s progress in the future. 

What did Marx and Engels discover during their study 
of history? First of all they decided that self-preservation is 
the supreme instinct in man and therefore his whole pattern 
of human conduct must have been governed by an attempt to 
wrest the necessities of life from nature. It is a dialectical 
process — man against nature. This led them to a monumental 
conclusion : all historical developments are the result of “Eco- 
nomic Determinism” — man’s effort to survive. They said that 
everything men do — whether it is organizing a government, 
establishing laws, supporting a particular moral code or prac- 
ticing religion — is merely the result of his desire to protect 
whatever mode of production he is currently using to secure 
the necessities of life. Furthermore, they believed that if some 


The Communist Approach 


revolutionary force changes the mode of production, the dom- 
inant class will immediately set about to create a different type 
of society designed to protect the new economic order. 

“Does it require deep intuition to comprehend that man’s 
ideas, views and conception, in one word, man’s consciousness, 
changes with every change in the conditions of material exist- 
ence. . . . What else does the history of ideas prove than that 
intellectual production changes in character in proportion as 
material production is changed 7” 1 

To appreciate their point of view, it is necessary to under- 
stand Marx and Engels’ mechanistic conception of the way the 
human mind works. They said that after the brain receives 
impressions from the outside world, it automatically moves 
the individual to take action (this is their Activist Theory). 
They did not believe knowledge could be acquired without 
motivating the owner to do something about it. For example, 
when men became aware that slavery was a satisfactory way 
to produce crops, construct buildings and enjoy various kinds 
of services, this knowledge moved the dominant class to create 
a society which protected the interest of the slave owners. 
And in modern times Marx and Engels believed that the 
bourgeois or property class have done the same thing by 
instinctively creating a society to protect their capitalistic 
interests. As they said to the bourgeois in the Communist 
Manifesto : 

“Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of 
your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your 
jurisprudence (system of law) is but the will of your class, 
made into law for all, a will whose essential character and 
direction are determined by the economic conditions of exist- 
ence of your class.” 2 

From this it will be seen that Marx and Engels did not 
believe that men could arbitrarily choose any one of several 
forms of society but only that one which promotes the prevail- 
ing mode of production. The very nature of man’s materialis- 


1 Marx-Engels, “COMMUNIST MANIFESTO,” p. 39. 

2 Marx-Engels, “communist manifesto,” p. 35. 


The Naked Communist 


tic make-up requires him to do this. “Are men free to choose 
this or that form of society? By no means .” 3 According to 
Marx the thing which we call “free will” is nothing more nor 
less than an awareness of the impelling forces which move 
an individual to action ; in taking action he is not free to 
change the course his very nature dictates. 

“Communism has no idea of freedom as the possibility 
of choice, of turning to right or left, but only as the possibility 
of giving full play to one’s energy when one has chosen which 
way to turn .” 4 

In other words, human minds receive knowledge of exist- 
ing economic circumstances and “choose” to turn in the direc- 
tion which is necessary to preserve the current mode of 
production. They are then free only in the sense that they are 
moved to decide that they will expend vast quantities of 
energy in building a superstructure of government, morals, 
laws and religion which will perpetuate these basic economic 
circumstances. At the foundation of all activities of society 
lies “Economic Determinism.” “The mode of production in 
material life determined the general character of the social, 
political and spiritual processes of life .” 5 

Marx and Engels now felt they had discovered something 
much more vital to human welfare than simply a philosophical 
explanation of history. In fact, they believed they had identi- 
fied Economic Determinism as the basic creative force in 
human progress. Having made this important discovery they 
felt that if they could somehow force upon mankind the influ- 
ence of a highly perfected system of economic production it 
would automatically produce a highly perfected society which, 
in turn, would automatically produce a higher type of human 
being. In other words, they would reverse the Judaic-Chris- 
tian approach which endeavors to improve humanity in order 
to improve society. Here again they were reaffirming their 
conviction that human beings are not the creators of society 
but its products: “The final causes of all social changes and 


3 Marx, Karl, “poverty of philosophy,” p. 152. 

4 Berdyaev, N., “vital realities,” p. 175. 

5 Marx, Karl, “contribution to critique of political economy,” p. 11. 


The Communist Approach 


political revolution are to be sought, not in men’s brains, not 
in man’s insight into eternal truth and justice . . . but in the 
economics of each particular epoch.” 1 ' 

Therefore, Marx and Engels advocated a change in eco- 
nomic structure as the only valid way of improving society 
and refining the intellectual make-up of humanity. But how 
can a new, improved system of production and distribution 
be introduced among men? What historical procedure has 
Economic Determinism unconsciously followed to bring man- 
kind to its present state of advancement? 

Human Progress 

Explained in Terms of Class Struggle 


Marx and Engels answered their own question by decid- 
ing that from earliest times the mode of production and the 
means of distribution have always produced two basic classes 
of people: those who owned the means of production and 
thereby became exploiters, and those who owned nothing and 
therefore had to sell or trade their physical labor to survive. 
The element of conflict between these two groups was identi- 
fied by Marx and Engels as the basic force in history which 
has prompted the evolution of society toward ever-ascending 
levels of achievement. 

“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history 
of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, 
lord and serf, guildmaster and journeyman, in a word, op- 
pressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one 
another, carried on an uninterrupted . . . fight that each time 
ended either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at 
large or in the common ruin of the contending classes .” 7 

Here again Marx and Engels were applying the principles 
of Dialectics. All past societies have been a combination of 
opposite force or classes — the exploiters and the exploited. 


« Engels, Friedrich, “socialism — utopian and scientific,” p . 5 i . 
7 Marx-Engels, “the communist manifesto,” p. 12. 


The Naked Communist 


The clash between them has always generated the dynamic 
force which has propelled society into some new development. 
The transition, they noted, was often accompanied by revolu- 
tion and violence. 

But must the course of human events always follow this 
never-ending cycle of clashes between the two opposing classes 
of society? Must there always be revolution to produce new 
orders which in turn are destroyed by revolution to produce 
others? Marx and Engels visualized a day when there would 
be unity among men instead of opposition, peace instead of 
war. Such a hope, of course, violated their own theory of 
dialectics which says nothing in nature can be at rest — every- 
thing is a unity of opposing forces. Nevertheless, Marx and 
Engels reasoned that since they had discovered the inexorable 
law of history with its self -improving device of class struggle, 
they would use one final, terrible class struggle for the purpose 
of permanently eliminating the thing which had caused all 
past conflicts in society. What is this one terrible feature of 
all past societies which has caused selfishness, jealousy, class 
struggle and war? Marx and Engels thought all of these 
things could be traced to one root — -private property. If they 
used a final revolutionary class uprising to overthrow private 
property, it would mean that class struggle would become un- 
necessary because there would be nothing to fight over ! 


The Communist Theory 
Concerning Private Property 

Why do Communists believe that private property is the 
root of all evil? 

Engels wrote that in primitive times he believed all peo- 
ple followed the principle of common ownership of everything 
except the most personal belongings such as clothing and 
weapons. Then he felt that the domestication of land and 
flocks resulted in certain men producing more commodities 
than they required for themselves, and therefore they began 


The Communist Approach 


exchanging these surplus items for other commodities which 
they lacked. He said these commodities used in exchange 
were naturally identified with the person who possessed them 
and thus the concept of private property was born . 8 

Engels then postulated that those who owned the land 
or other means of production would obviously reap the major 
profit from the economic resources of the community and 
ultimately this would place them in a position to hire other 
men to do their work. They would be able to dictate wages, 
hours and conditions of labor for their employees, thereby 
insuring their own freedom and social status while exploiting 
the toiling class. Therefore, said Engels, out of private prop- 
erty blossomed class antagonism with its entourage of camp 
followers: greed, pride, selfishness, imperialism and war. He 
said private property also had led to the necessity of creating 
the State. 

The Communist Theory of the Origin of the State 

Engels decided that when the non-property class had been 
exploited to the point where there was danger of revolt, the 
dominant class created an organ of power to maintain “law 
and order,” that is, a system of laws to protect the private 
property and advantages of the exploiting class. This new 
order, he said, is the State. 

“The state, then, is . . . simply a product of society at a 
certain stage of evolution. It (the creation of any kind of 
government) is the confession that this society has become 
hopelessly divided against itself, has entangled itself in ir- 
reconcilable contradictions which it is powerless to banish .” 9 

Therefore the State is designed to postpone the day of 
judgment. Government is the “instrument of power” — the 
unnatural appendage to society — which is created for the ex- 

s See Friedrich Engels, “the origin of the family, private prop- 
erty AND THE STATE.” 

9 Engels, Friedrich, “the origin of the family, private property 
AND THE STATE,” p . 206 . 


The Naked Communist 


press purpose of protecting the privileged class and the private 
property it possesses from the just demands of the exploited 
class. Marx and Engels reasoned that if they somehow could 
eliminate private property, it would do away with class strug- 
gle, and then the state would no longer be necessary and it 
would gradually wither away. 


The Communist Theory of the Origin and 
Economic Significance of Religion 

Marx and Engels further believed that another great evil 
has grown out of private property — the exploitation of re- 
ligion. They recognized, of course, that probably the roots 
of religion were established long before the institution of 
private property. However, they felt that since religion was 
not of divine origin it must have grown out of the frantic 
efforts of early man to explain the forces of nature and man’s 
psychic experiences such as dreams. When private property 
emerged as the foundation of society, they believed religion 
was seized upon as a device to put down the rebellion of the 
exploited class. 

According to Marx it was the property class who wanted 
their workers to be taught humility, patience and long-suffer- 
ing; to endure the wrongs heaped upon them with the hope 
that justice would be meted out “in the next life.” He said 
religion was made to serve as an opiate for the oppressed. 
The workers were told to “judge not” but to remain passive 
and dutiful toward their masters. “Religion is the sigh of the 
oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, as it 
is the spirit of spiritless conditions. It is the opium of the 
people .” 10 

This explains the presence of vigorous anti-religious cam- 
paigns in the Communist program: “One of the most im- 
portant tasks of the cultural revolution affecting the wide 


10 “SELECTED ESSAYS OF MARX,” p. 16. 


The Communist Approach 


masses is the task of systematically and unswervingly combat- 
ing religion — the opium of the people.” 1 ’ “There can be no 
doubt about the fact that the new state of the U.S.S.R. is led 
by the Communist Party, with a program permeated by the 
spirit of militant atheism .” 12 “Have we suppressed the re- 
actionary clergy? Yes, we have. The unfortunate thing is 
that it has not been completely liquidated .” 13 

The Communist Theory of the Origin and 
Economic Significance of Morals 

Up to this point Marx and Engels felt they had estab- 
lished that the evil of private property is responsible for the 
origin of class antagonisms, the creation of the State and the 
exploitation of religion. Now they attached a similar explana- 
tion to the origin and economic significance of morals. Engels 
and Marx denied that there could be any eternal basis for 
the moral standards of “right and wrong” set up in the Judaic- 
Christian code. Lenin summarized their ideas when he said: 
“In what sense do we deny ethics, morals? In the sense in 
which they are preached by the bourgeoisie, which deduces 
these morals from God’s commandments. Of course, we say 
that we do not believe in God. We know perfectly well that 
the clergy, the landlords, and the bourgeoisie all claimed to 
speak in the name of God, in order to protect their own in- 
terests as exploiters. We deny all morality taken from super- 
human or non-class concepts. We say that this is a decep- 
tion, a swindle, a befogging of the minds of the workers and 
peasants in the interests of the landlords and capitalists .” 14 

The Marxists believe that “Thou Shalt Not Steal” and 
“Thou Shalt Not Covet” are examples of the dominant class 
trying to impose respect for property on the exploited masses 

11 “program OF the communist international,” International Pub- 
lishers , New York, 1930, p. 5.',. 

Yaroslavsky, E., “religion in the USSR,” p. 59. 

1:1 Stalin, Joseph, “leninism,” Vol. I, p. 387. 

11 Lenin, V. I. “RELIGION,” pp. .<,7-48. 


The Naked Communist 


who cannot help but covet the wealth and property of their 
masters. As Engels said: “Thou shalt not steal. Does this 
law thereby become an eternal moral law? By no means .” 15 
They called such teachings “class” morality — a code designed 
to protect the property class. 

But in rejecting the Judaic-Christian code of morals, 
Engels tried to represent that Communism was merely moving 
up to a higher level where human conduct will be motivated 
exclusively by the needs of society: “We say that our morality 
is wholly subordinated to the interest of the class-struggle of 
the proletariat .” 15 But in spite of this attempt to delicately 
obscure the true significance of Communist moral thought, 
Engels could not prevent himself from occasionally unveiling 
the truth of what was in his mind: “We therefore reject 
every attempt to impose on us any moral dogma what- 
ever. . . ,” 16 In other words, Communism undertakes to re- 
place Judaic-Christian morals with a complete absence of 
morals. That this was exactly what later Communists de- 
duced from the teachings of their leaders is demonstrated in 
the words of a modern American Marxist: “With him (the 
Communist) the end justifies the means. Whether his tactics 
be legal or moral or not, does not concern him, so long as 
they are effective. He knows that the laws as well as the 
current code of morals are made by his mortal enemies. . . . 
Consequently, he ignores them insofar as he is able, and it 
suits his purposes. He proposes to develop, regardless of 
capitalist conceptions of ‘legality,’ ‘fairness,’ ‘right,’ etc., a 
greater power than his capitalist enemies have. . . ,” 17 

So now Marx and Engels had completed their original 
purposes in making an intensive study of history. They felt 
they had successfully explained the origin of the various in- 
stitutions in society by showing that all of these were the 
product of Economic Determinism, and they felt they had 
traced to its source the cause of strife, inequity and injustice 
among men — private property. Only one task now remained 


13 Lenin, V. /., “religion,” p. 1,7. 

1,1 Friedrich Engels quoted in the “handbook of marxism,” p. 21,9. 
17 Foster, William Z., “syndicalism,” p. 9. 


The Communist Approach 


for the master architects — to apply this knowledge to a “plan 
of action” which would permanently solve the economic, politi- 
cal and social ills of all mankind. 


The Communist Plan of Action 

As Marx and Engels analyzed modern civilization they 
concluded that capitalistic society is rapidly reaching that 
point where a revolution is inevitable. This is the way they 
reasoned: After the overthrow of feudalism the capitalistic 
society came into being. At first it consisted primarily of 
individuals who owned their own land or their own workshops. 
Each man did his own work and reaped the economic benefits 
to which he was entitled. Then the industrial revolution came 
along and the private workshop was supplanted by the factory. 
Products no longer came from the private workshop but from 
the factory where the united effort of many individuals pro- 
duced the commodity. Engels said manufacturing thereby be- 
came social production rather than private production. It was 
therefore wrong for private individuals to continue owning the 
factory because the factory had become a social institution. He 
argued that no private individual should get the profits from 
something which many people were required to produce. 

“But,” critics asked, “do not the workers share in the 
profits of the factory through their wages?” 

Marx and Engels did not believe that wages were ade- 
quate compensation for labor performed unless the workers 
received all the proceeds from the sale of the commodity. Since 
the hands of the workers produced the commodity they be- 
lieved the workers should receive all the commodity was worth. 
They believed that the management and operation of a factory 
were only “clerical in nature” and that in the near future 
the working class should rise up and seize the factories or 
means of production and operate them as their own. 

“But does not the investment of the capitalist entitle him 
to some profit? Without his willingness to risk considerable 
wealth would there be any factory?” 


The Naked Communist 


Marx and Engels answered this by saying that all wealth 
is created by the worker. Capital creates nothing. Marx and 
Engels believed that the reason certain men have been able 
to accumulate wealth is because they have taken away the 
fruits of the worker in the form of interest, rent or profits. 
They said this was “surplus value” which had been milked 
from the labor of men in the past and should be confiscated 
from the capitalists by the workers of the present. 

Marx and Engels now dared to predict the ultimate trend 
of development in modern capitalistic civilization. They 
said that just as private workshops had been taken over by 
the factory, so the small factory would be taken over by the 
big combine. They said the monopoly of capital would con- 
tinue until it was concentrated in the hands of fewer and 
fewer men while the number of exploited workers would grow 
proportionately. And while a few were becoming richer and 
richer the exploited class would get poorer and poorer. They 
predicted that the members of the so-called middle class who 
own small shops and businesses would be squeezed out of 
economic existence because they could not compete with the 
mammoth business combines. They also predicted that the 
government would be the instrument of power which the 
great banks and industrial owners would use to protect their 
ill-gotten wealth and to suppress the revolt of the exploited 
masses. 

In other words, all levels of society were being forced into 
the opposing camps of two antagonistic classes — the exploit- 
ing class of capitalistic property owners and the bitterly ex- 
ploited class of the propertyless workers. 

They further predicted that the revolutionary explosion 
between these two classes would be sparked by the inevitable 
advancement of technological improvements in capitalistic in- 
dustry. The rapid invention of more and more efficient 
machines was bound to throw more and more workers out of 
employment and leave their families to starve or perhaps 
survive on a bare subsistence level. In due time there would 
be sufficient hatred, resentment and class antagonism to moti- 
vate the workers in forming militant battalions to overthrow 


The Communist Approach 


their oppressors by violence so that the means of production 
and all private property could be seized by the workers and 
operated for their own advantage. 

It is at this point that Communists and Socialists take 
different forks of the road. The Socialists have maintained 
from the beginning that centralized control of all land and 
industry can be achieved by peaceful legislation. Marx de- 
nounced this as a pipe dream. He held out for revolution. 
Nevertheless, he was quick to see some advantage in pushing 
forward any legislation which concentrated greater eco- 
nomic power in the central government. But he did not look 
upon such minor “victories of the Socialists” as anything more 
than a psychological softening up for the revolution which was 
to come. 

Marx was particularly emphatic that this revolution 
must be completely ruthless to be successful. It must not be 
a “reform” because reforms always end up by “substitut- 
ing one group of exploiters for another” and therefore the 
reformers feel “no need to destroy the old state machine; 
whereas the proletarian revolution removes all groups of 
exploiters from power and places in power the leader of the 
toilers and exploited . . . therefore it cannot avoid destroying 
the old state machine and replacing it by a new one.” 13 

Marx further justified the use of violence to bring about 
the new society because he felt that if moral principles were 
followed the revolution would be abortive. He pointed to 
the failure of the Socialist Revolution in France during 1871 : 
“Two errors robbed the brilliant victory of its fruit. The 
proletariat stopped half-way: instead of proceeding with the 
‘expropriation of the expropriators,’ it was carried away with 
dreams of establishing supreme justice in the country. . . . 
The second error was unnecessary magnanimity of the pro- 
letariat: instead of annihilating its enemies, it endeavored to 
exercise moral influence on them.” 19 

Marx attempted to soften the blow of his doctrine of 

18 Quoted from “problems of leninism,” by Joseph Stalin, pp. 16-17. 

19 Marx, Karl, “the civil war in France,” p. SO. 


The Naked Communist 


violence by stating that he would be perfectly satisfied if the 
capitalistic state could be transformed into a Communist so- 
ciety by peaceful means; however, he pointed out that this 
would be possible only if the capitalists voluntarily sur- 
rendered their property and power to the representatives of 
the workers without a fight. He logically concludes that since 
this is rather unlikely it must be assumed that revolutionary 
violence is unavoidable. 

Marx and Engels were also convinced that the revolution 
must be international in scope. They knew that all countries 
would not be ready for the revolution at the same time, but 
all Marxist writers have emphasized the “impossibility of the 
complete and final victory of socialism in a single country 
without the victory of the revolution in other countries .” 20 


The Dictatorship of the Proletariat 


Since they now believed a revolution was inevitable, the 
next question Marx and Engels asked was this : Should they 
wait for it to come in the normal course of events or should 
they take steps to promote the revolution and speed up the 
evolution of society toward Communism? Marx and Engels 
decided that it had become their manifest duty to see that the 
revolution was vigorously promoted. Why prolong the suffer- 
ing? The old society was doomed. In the light of the principles 
discovered by Marx and Engels perhaps the race could be 
saved a dozen generations of exploitation and injustice simply 
by compressing this entire phase of social evolution into a 
single generation of violent readjustment. 

They felt it could be done in three steps: First, by wip- 
ing out the old order. “There is but one way of simplifying, 
shortening, concentrating the death agony of the old society 
as well as the bloody labor of the new world’s birth — Revolu- 
tionary Terror .” 21 Second, the representatives of the working 

2 ® “PROGRAM OF THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL,” pp. 31,-35. 

21 Quoted, from the “neue rheinische zeitung,” by J. E. LeRossignol 

in “FROM MARX TO STALIN,” p. 231. 


The Communist Approach 


class must then set up a Dictatorship of the Proletariat. 
Joseph Stalin described the things which must be accom- 
plished during this period of the dictatorship: 

1. Completely suppress the old capitalist class. 

2. Create a mighty army of “defense” to he used “for the 
consolidation of the ties with the proletarians of other 
lands, and for the development and the victory of the 
revolution in all countries." 

3. Consolidate the unity of the masses in support of the 
Dictatorship. 

4. Establish universal socialism by eliminating private 
property and preparing all mankind for the ultimate 
adoption of full Communism. 22 

Third, the final step is the transition from socialism to 
full Communism. Socialism is characterized by state owner- 
ship of land and all means of production. Marx and Engels 
believed that after awhile when class consciousness has dis- 
appeared and there is no further resistance to be overcome, 
the state will gradually wither away and then property will 
automatically belong to all mankind “in common.” Later 
Lenin explained how the Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
would pave the way for this final phase. He said the dictator- 
ship would be “an organization for the systematic use of 
violence by one class against the other, by one part of the 
population against another. . . . But, striving for Socialism, 
we are convinced that it will develop further into Communism, 
and, side by side with this, there will vanish all need for force, 
for the subjection of one man to another, of one section of 
society to another, since people will grow accustomed to ob- 
serving the elementary conditions of social existence without 
force and without subjection.” 23 

Even in the latter stages of Socialism, Lenin visualized a 
world without courts, lawyers, judges, rulers, elected repre- 
sentatives or even policemen. All these would be swept down 
into the limbo of forgotten and useless appendages which 


-- Stalin, Joseph, “problems of leninism,” pp. 26-27. 

23 Lenin, V. /., “imperialism : the state and revolution,” p. 187. 


The Naked Communist 


characterized the old order of decadent capitalism. Lenin said 
the spontaneous homogeneity of the socialized masses would 
make all the machinery of the old order superfluous. He felt 
that the new society would even change human nature until 
resistance to the communal society would become “a rare ex- 
ception and will probably be accompanied by such swift and 
severe punishment (for the armed workers are men of practi- 
cal life, not sentimental intellectuals, and they will scarcely 
allow anyone to trifle with them), and very soon the necessity 
of observing the simple, fundamental rules of everyday social 
life in common will have become a habit. The door will then 
be open for the transition from the first phase of communism 
to the higher phase (full Communism ).” 24 


The Classless, Stateless Society Under 
Full Communism 

All Marxists fervently hope that the new society will 
produce the changes in human nature which are necessary be- 
fore full Communism can become a reality. Individuals must 
forget that there was ever a time when income could be se- 
cured from the mere ownership of property or from produc- 
tive labor. In other words, wages will be abolished. They 
must forget that some people once received very large in- 
comes while others received small ones. They must lose any 
hope of a graduated pay-scale for differences in productivity 
or service. They must forget all about differences in skill, 
training, and mental or physical abilities. They must come 
around to the notion that, if man does the best he can in the 
best type of work for which he is fitted, he is just as good and 
just as deserving of income as any other man regardless of 
differences in productivity and output. This is the Commu- 
nist promise that, “Each will produce according to his ability 
and each will receive according to his need.” He must give 
up his old profit-motive incentive and become socially minded 


21 Lenin, V. /., “imperialism : the state and revolution,” p. 7r>9. 


The Communist Approach 


so that he will work as hard as he can for the benefit of society 
a's a whole and at the same time be content to receive, as a 
reward for his work, an amount of income based on his needs 
in consumption. 

Marx and Engels presumed that under such a system the 
output of production would be so tremendous that they could 
dispense with markets, money and prices. Commodities would 
be stockpiled at various central places, and all individuals 
who worked would be entitled to help themselves on the basis 
of their needs. Marx and Engels felt there would be no partic- 
ular incentive to take more than was needed at any one time 
because, due to the superabundance of commodities, the 
worker could replenish his desires at will. Services were like- 
wise to be dispensed at convenient places and individuals 
could call for these services as they felt they were needed. 

Under these pleasant circumstances, the Marxist writers 
explain, the government machinery of the State will no longer 
be necessary: 

“Only Communism renders the state absolutely unneces- 
sary, for there is no one to be suppressed — ‘no one’ in the 
sense of a class, in the sense of a systematic struggle with a 
definite section of the population. We are not Utopians (be- 
lieving that society can function on a sublime level of perfec- 
tion), and we do not in the least deny the possibility and in- 
evitability of excesses on the part of individual persons, nor 
the need to suppress such excesses. But, in the first place, 
no special machinery, no special apparatus of repression is 
needed for this : this will be done by the armed people itself, 
as simply and as readily as any crowd of civilized people, even 
in modern society, parts a pair of combatants or does not al- 
low a woman to be outraged. And, secondly, we know that 
the fundamental social cause of excesses ... is the exploitation 
of the masses, their want and their poverty. With the re- 
moval of this chief cause, excesses will inevitably begin to 
‘wither away.’ We do not know how quickly and in what suc- 
cession, but we know that they will wither away. With their 
withering away, the state will also wither away .”- 5 

25 Bums, E., “handbook of marxism,” p. 71,7. 


The Naked Communist 


It is significant that Communist theory treats the prole- 
tariat as though it were a unique branch of the human race. 
The proletariat is assumed to be a special breed which would 
almost automatically blossom into pleasant, efficient social- 
economic living if it could just be liberated from oppressive 
government. The government is presumed to be nothing more 
than the tool of an oppressive class of capitalists and con- 
sequently, if the capitalist class were destroyed, the need for 
any kind of government would be obliterated. The Commu- 
nist leaders have always felt confident that when the 
proletariat takes over it will not want to oppress anyone and 
therefore the need for government will be nonexistent. 

It is also worthy of note that Lenin wanted the proletariat 
to be an “armed people.” This prospect did not frighten Len- 
in at all. He had unmitigated confidence that the members of 
the proletariat would never abuse their power as the capitalists 
had done. Furthermore, Lenin assumed that the proletariat 
had the instinctive capacity to recognize justice on sight. Not 
only would they use their weapons to put down any nonsocial 
acts in the community by spontaneous “mass action,” but 
Lenin believed they would genuinely and heroically suppress 
any selfish, nonsocial tendencies in themselves. They would 
have acquired the “habit” of living in a communal social order 
and would have grown “accustomed to observing the elemen- 
tary conditions of social existence without force and without 
subjection.” 

Lenin then says that with the machinery of government 
gone and with the Communist pattern of a classless, stateless 
society established throughout the world, finally “it becomes 
possible to speak of freedom !” 2fi 


Burns, E., “handbook of marxism,” p. 71,5. 



IV 

A Brief Critique of the 
Communist Approach to World Problems 

The modern student of history and economics will have little 
difficulty discovering for himself where Communist theory 
departs from the most elementary aspects of reality. 

Disciples of Marx look upon the theories of Communism 
as the most penetrating analysis of history ever made by man, 
but many scholars look upon the whole Communist framework 
as more or less the product of the times in which Marx and 
Engels lived. The writings of these men clearly reflect a 
studied attempt to reconcile the five great influences of their 
generation, which they tried to bring together in one single 
pattern of thought. The influences which left their mark on 
the minds of Marx and Engels were : 

First, the violent economic upheaval of their day. This 
is believed to have made Marx and Engels over-sensitive to 
the place of economics in history. 

Second, the widespread popularity of the German phi- 
losopher, Georg Wilhelm Hegel. His theory of “Dialectics” 
was adopted by Marx and Engels with slight modification to 



The Naked Communist 


62 explain all phenomena of nature, the class struggle and the 
inevitable triumph of a future proletariat society. 

Third, the anti-religious cynicism of Nineteenth Century 
Materialism. This led them to try to explain everything 
in existence in terms of one single factor — matter. They 
denied intelligent design in the universe, the existence of God, 
the divinity of religion and the moral precepts of Judaic- 
Christian teachings. 

Fourth, the social and economic ideals of Utopian Com- 
munism. Marx and Engels decided they wanted a communal 
society, but they felt it had to be a controlled society; they 
therefore abandoned the brotherhood principle of the Utopi- 
ans and declared that Communism could only be initiated 
under a powerful dictatorship. 

Fifth, the revolutionary spirit of the Anarchists. Marx 
and Engels promised two things which appealed to the 
Anarchists — the use of violent revolution to overthrow exist- 
ing powers, and eventually the creation of a classless, state- 
less society. 

It is because of these five important influences that the 
student of Communism will find it to be a vast conglomerate, 
designed, it would seem, to be all things to all people. 


Communism as a By-Product of the 
Industrial Revolution 

Marx and Engels were born in the midst of the Industrial 
Revolution. Before this revolution four out of every five citi- 
zens were farmers, but by the time Marx and Engels were 
ready for college the mass migration of farmers to the in- 
dustrial centers was reaching the proportions of a flood tide. 
The resulting concentration of the population created slum- 
ridden cities which, in turn, contributed to disease, violence 
and vice. It was a chain-reaction which grew out of the amaz- 
ing new machine-age. Pioneers of the Industrial Revolution 
looked upon machines as the pounding, pumping, inanimate 


A Brief Critique 


monsters that would eventually liberate mankind from the 
slavery of “bare-subsistence” economics, but the negative 
critics saw in them only the problems they created — disloca- 
tion of the population, maladjustment for the individual, the 
family and the community, and finally, the inhuman treatment 
of the men, women and children who served industry. 

Thus, Marx and Engels, like many others, felt a violent 
reaction to the times in which they lived. Because it was a 
period of economic upheaval, perhaps it is understandable that 
they should have reached the conclusion that economic forces 
constitute the cruel and ruthless iron hand which has guided 
the course of all human history. It is at this point that we 
begin our critique of Communist theory. 


The Communist Interpretation of History 


fallacy 1 — The first fallacy of Communism is its attempt 
to over-simplify history. Marx and Engels attempted to 
change history from a fluid stream, fed by human activities 
from millions of tributaries, into a fixed, undeviating, pre- 
determined course of progress which could be charted in the 
past and predicted for the future on the basis of a single, 
simple criterion — economics. Obviously economics have 
played a vital and powerful role in human history but so have 
climate, topography, access to oceans and inland waterways, 
mechanical inventions, scientific discoveries, national and 
racial affinities, filial affection, religion, desire for explanatory 
adventure, sentiments of loyalty, patriotism and a multitude 
of other factors. 

A number of modern Communists have admitted that 
history is molded by all of these different influences, but they 
have insisted that Marx and Engels intended to include all of 
them in their Economic Determinism; because all of these 
things directly or indirectly affect the economic life of human- 
ity. However, the writings of Marx and Engels fail to reflect 
any such interpretation. Even if they did, the modern Marxist 
would still be in difficulty because if Economic Determinism is 


63 


The Naked Communist 


intended to include every influence in life then the Communist 
formula for interpreting history would be: “Everything de- 
termines everything.” As a basis for interpreting history 
this would be absurd. 

Another group of modern Communists has tried to extri- 
cate Marx and Engels from the narrow confines of Economic 
Determinism by suggesting that economic circumstances do 
not absolutely determine the course of human history but 
merely condition men to follow after a particular trend in 
social development . 1 But this, of course, while coming closer 
to the truth, presumes a variable element of free will in the 
making of history which Marx and Engels emphatically de- 
nied. In fact, Economic Determinism in the absolute, fixed 
and undeviating sense, is the very foundation for the pre- 
diction of Marx and Engels that society must follow an in- 
evitable course of development from capitalism to socialism 
and from socialism to Communism. This is what they meant 
when they said of capitalism : “Its fall and the victory of the 
proletariat are equally inevitable .” 2 

Furthermore, when any modern Marxist attempts to 
argue that the course of human progress is not fixed and in- 
evitable he destroys the entire justification for the Communist 
Revolution — that violent upheaval which Marx said was the 
“one way of simplifying, shortening, concentrating the death 
agony of the old society .” 3 There is no excuse for the use of 
lethal violence to concentrate and simplify the death of the old 
society unless the death of that society is, in fact, inevitable. 
That was the heart of Marx’s argument. His excuse for 
revolution falters if it is admitted that the death of the old 
society is merely one of several possibilities and not necessarily 
inevitable. Likewise, his excuse is exploded if it is shown 
that the present society is not dying at all but is actually 
more robust than ever before and seems to be contributing 
more to the welfare of mankind with each passing generation. 


1 See Shirokov-Mosley, “a textbook of marxism,” p. 22. 

2 Marx and Engels, “communist manifesto,” p. 29. 

3 Marx, quoted by J. E. LeRossignol in “from marx to stalin,” p. 321. 


A Brief Critique 


So the Communist interpretation of history on the basis 
of Economic Determinism turns out to be a weak and brittle 
reed even in the hands of its defenders. The disciples of 
Marx have recognized its weaknesses and tried to patch it up 
but the patches have only created new splinters in the already 
frail, dry straws of Communist logic. 

FALLACY 2 — Marx and Engels not only over-simplified 
history, but they relied on a second fallacy in order to justify 
the first. They said that the human mind is incapable of moral 
free will in the sense that it makes a choice in directing the 
course of history. Marx and Engels believed that material 
circumstances force the human mind to move in a certain direc- 
tion and that man does not have the free will to resist it. This 
sounds like the teachings of the Nineteenth Century Mechan- 
istic Materialists who claimed that the brain is somewhat like 
a passive wax tablet which receives impressions from the 
outside world and then responds automatically to them; but 
Marx and Engels did not want to be identified with this school 
of thought. They therefore said the run-of-the-mill material- 
ists had made a mistake. The brain is not passive like a wax 
tablet but is an active embodiment which not only receives im- 
pressions from the outside world but has the ability to digest 
those impressions through a process of analysis and synthesis. 
Then came the joker. 

They declared that after the brain has digested its im- 
pressions of the outside world it always decides to do whatever 
is necessary for the preservation of the individual in the light 
of material circumstances. In their own subtle way they were 
simply saying that man is the victim of his material environ- 
ment. By a slightly different line of thinking they had reached 
exactly the same conclusions as the mechanistic materialists 
whom they had repudiated. 

It will be recalled from the previous chapter that Marx 
and Engels identified the thing we call “free will” as being 
nothing more nor less than a conscious awareness of the mate- 
rialistic forces which impel the individual to act. This con- 
scious awareness of “natural necessity” makes men think they 
are choosing a course of action, when, as matter of fact, they 


The Naked Communist 


are simply watching' themselves follow the dictates of mate- 
rial circumstances. 

Once again it will be seen that Marx and Engels over- 
simplified. The complexities of human behavior cannot be 
explained simply in terms of “necessary” responses to material 
circumstances. Often men defy material circumstances to 
satisfy numerous other motivations such as the desire for 
self-expression, the moving power of a religious conviction, 
the drive of a moral sense of duty, the satisfying of personal 
pride or the realizing of a personal ambition. 

This fallacy — the refusal to recognize man’s moral agency 
and the power to make a choice — is fatal to Marxism. It is 
the initial error on which a multitude of other fallacies are 
built. When Communism says the human mind is the absolute 
victim of material circumstances and that human history is 
merely the unavoidable response of human beings to physical 
conditions, it must demonstrate these claims with examples. 
Note how this fallacy compounds itself as Marx and Engels 
attempt to use it in explaining the structure of society. 

The Communist Explanation of Society 

fallacy 3 — First of all, Marx and Engels said the form 
of society is automatically determined by the economic condi- 
tions which motivate the dominant class in any particular age. 
As Marx put it: “Are men free to choose this or that form of 
society for themselves? By no means. Assume a particular 
state of development in the productive forces of man and you 
will get a particular form of commerce and consumption. As- 
sume a particular stage of development in production, com- 
merce and consumption and you will have a corresponding 
social structure, a corresponding organization of the family, 
of orders or of classes, in a word, a corresponding civil society. 
Presuppose a particular civil society and you will get particu- 
lar political conditions which are only the official expression 
of civil society.” 4 


4 Marx, Karl, “poverty of philosophy,” pp. 152-153. 


A Brief Critique 


It seems inconceivable that Marx and Engels could have 
allowed wishful thinking to so completely obscure the facts 
of history that they would have convinced themselves that 
when a certain type of production exists a certain type of 
society must exist also. In ancient times the mode of produc- 
tion remained the same for centuries while society ran the 
gamut of almost continuous change. Historians and econo- 
mists have pointed out that if history demonstrates anything 
at all it is the fact that there is no direct relation between mode 
of production and the form society will take. Let us see why. 


The Origin of the State 

fallacy 4 — Marx and Engels believed that the State 
(any form of sovereign government) is an unnecessary ap- 
pendage to society which the dominant class creates to forci- 
bly preserve its interests and suppress the uprising of the 
exploited class. Marx and Engels did not believe any govern- 
ment in any age represented the interests of all of the people 
or even the welfare of a majority of the people. In the Com- 
munist Manifesto they said: “The executive (branch) of the 
modern State is but a Committee for managing the common 
affair of the whole bourgeoisie (property class ).” 5 

Sociologists, psychologists, historians and political scien- 
tists point out that not by any stretch of imagination can 
government be called an appendage to society because it is 
the very heart of group living. This is true because society 
cannot exist unless it is governed by some degree of authority, 
and the presence of authority in society constitutes “govern- 
ment.” Man is by nature a social and political being, and 
therefore the creation of governments to direct the members 
of the community toward their common welfare is simply 
an inherent expression of the very nature of man. Therefore 
a stateless society (a civilization without a government) which 

5 Marx and Engels, “rHE communist manifesto,” p. 15. 


The Naked Communist 


Marx and Engels vigorously advocated would be an unorgan- 
ized mob. It would be no society at all. 

FALLACY 5 — Marx and Engels also encounter difficulty 
when the form of the State is explained as an inevitable out- 
growth of some particular form of economic circumstances. 
If this were true then the same mode of production would 
always produce the same essential form of government. Let 
us take a look at the history of ancient Greece and ancient 
Rome. In both of these nations the fundamental mode of 
production was slavery. According to the Marxian explana- 
tion the form of these governments should have remained 
approximately the same so long as the mode of production 
(slavery) remained in effect. But contrary to Marxian ex- 
pectations we find both these governments passing through 
many changes even though the mode of production did not 
change. In Athens there was a succession of hereditary mon- 
archies, followed by the aristocratic and democratic republics, 
then the despotism of the thirty tyrants and finally democracy 
was established once again. In Rome there was first an elec- 
tive royalty followed by the aristocratic and democratic 
republics, and then came the absolute monarchy under the 
Caesars. These are typical of the incidents in history where 
the form of the government has changed while the mode of 
production has remained the same. 

Now let us illustrate the fallacy of this Communist theory 
another way. If the form of the State is fixed by Economic 
Determinism, then the form of the State should change when 
the mode of production changes. But this seldom happens. 
Take the history of the United States for instance. The form 
of the U.S. Government has remained essentially the same 
since its founding. Was the government different in the slave- 
economy of the south than the industrial economy of the north ? 
Did the government in the south change after slavery was 
abolished? The mode of production changed, the form of 
government did not. In other words, men can create any 
form of government they wish without reference to the pre- 
vailing mode of production. There are many historical exam- 
ples which clearly refute this important Communist concept. 


A Brief Critique 


fallacy 6 — In connection with the creation of the State, 
the Communists also maintain that a code of laws is developed 
to protect the exploiting class; further, that if the mode of 
production changes the code of laws will have to be reformu- 
lated to foster the specific new mode of production. Logically, 
this would mean that each time there is a revolutionary change 
in the mode of production there will have to be a revolution- 
ary change in the system of law. In no instance should the 
same code of law be capable of serving nations which are 
under different modes of production. 

Once again history throws confusion on Communism when 
this theory is applied to specific situations. One of the best 
examples is the history of the Western World where radical 
changes in methods of production have often been followed 
by no more than minor alterations in the various codes of 
law. Modern capitalistic society throughout Europe and 
America is, in general, governed by codes of law which are 
founded on the same fundamental principle as those which 
prevailed centuries before the Industrial Revolution. In Eng- 
land the Common Law was developed during the days of a 
feudal economy. The overthrow of Feudalism only strength- 
ened the Common Law, and it was further strengthened after 
the Industrial Revolution. In America the abolition of slavery 
did not overthrow the fundamental legal code of either the 
states or the nation. These are simple examples of the rather 
obvious historical fact that there is no essential dependence 
between society’s method of production and the code of laws 
which it chooses to create. 


What Is Religion? 

fallacy 7 — Communism further alleges that religion is 
not of divine origin but is simply a man-made tool used by the 
dominant class to suppress the exploited class. Marx and 
Engels described religion as the opiate of the people which is 
designed to lull them into humble submission and an accept- 


The Naked Communist 


ance of the prevailing mode of production which the dominant 
class desires to perpetuate. Any student of history would 
agree that there have been times in history when unscrupulous 
individuals and even misdirected religious organizations have 
abused the power of religion, just as all other institutions of 
society have been abused at various times. But it was not the 
abuse of religion which Marx and Engels deplored so much as 
the very existence of religion. They considered it a creation 
of the dominant class, a tool and a weapon in the hands of the 
oppressors. They pointed out the three-fold function of re- 
ligion from their point of view: first, it teaches respect for 
property rights; second, it teaches the poor their duties to- 
wards the property and prerogatives of the ruling class; and 
third, it instills a spirit of acquiescence among the exploited 
poor so as to destroy their revolutionary spirit. 

The fallacy of these allegations is obvious to any student 
of Judaic-Christian teachings. The Biblical teaching of re- 
spect for property applies to rich and poor alike ; it admonishes 
the rich to give the laborer his proper wages and to share 
their riches with the needy. Time and again the Old Testa- 
ment denounces the selfish rich because “the spoil of the poor 
is in your houses. What mean ye that ye beat my people to 
pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? saith the Lord .” 6 

The New Testament denunciation of the selfish rich is 
just as pointed: “Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for 
your miseries that shall come upon you. . . . Behold, the hire 
of the laborers who have reaped down your fields, which is 
of you kept back by fraud, crieth : and the cries of them which 
have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth .” 7 
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than 
for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God .” 8 

As to the allegation of the Communist that religion makes 
men passive, we have only to observe that the dynamic power 
of religious convictions is precisely what prevents a soundly 


0 Isaiah 3 :11,-15. 

7 James 5:1-6. 

8 Matthew 19:21,. 


A Brief Critique 


religious person from accepting Communist oppression and 
Communist mandates. A person practicing the teachings of 
the Judaic-Christian philosophy will not lie or steal on com- 
mand. He will not shed innocent blood. He will not partici- 
pate in the diabolical Communist practice of genocide — the 
systematic extermination of entire nations or classes. 

It is clearly evident from the numerous Communist writ- 
ings that what they fear in religion is not that it makes re- 
ligious people passive to the dominant class but that it prevents 
them from becoming passive to Communist discipline. Deep 
spiritual convictions stand like a wall of resistance to chal- 
lenge the teachings and practices of Communism. 

Furthermore, the Communist sees in the dynamic ide- 
ology of Judaic-Christian teachings a force for peace which 
cuts through the vitals of Communism’s campaign for world- 
wide revolution. As Anatole Lunarcharsky, the former Rus- 
sian Commissar of Education declared: “We hate Christians 
and Christianity. Even the best of them must be considered 
our worst enemies. They preach love of one’s neighbor and 
mercy, which is contrary to our principles. Christian love is 
an obstacle to the development of the Revolution. Down with 
love of our neighbor ! What we want is hate. . . . Only then 
can we conquer the universe .” 9 


The Communist Theory of Morals 

FALLACY 8 — Communist writers likewise maintain that 
the Judaic-Christian code of ethics is “class” morality. By 
this they mean that the Ten Commandments and the ethics 
of Christianity were created to protect private property and 
the property class. To show the lengths to which Communist 
writers have gone to defend this view we will mention several 
of their favorite interpretations of the Ten Commandments. 
They believe that “Honor thy Father and thy Mother” was 


3 Quoted in U. S. Congressional Record, Vol. 77, pp. 1539-1510. 


The Naked Communist 


created by the early Hebrews to emphasize to their children 
the fact that they were the private property of their parents. 
“Thou shalt not kill” was attributed to the belief of the domi- 
nant class that their bodies were private property and there- 
fore they should be protected along with other property rights. 
“Thou shalt not commit adultery” and “Thou shalt not covet 
thy neighbor’s wife” were said to have been created to imple- 
ment the idea that a husband was the master of the home and 
the wife was strictly private property belonging to him. 

This last line of reasoning led to some catastrophic con- 
sequences when the Communists came into power in Russia. 
In their anxiety to make women “equal with men” and pre- 
vent them from becoming private property, they degraded 
womankind to the lowest and most primitive level. Some 
Communist leaders advocated complete libertinism and pro- 
miscuity to replace marriage and the family. Excerpts from 
a decree issued in the Soviet of Saralof will illustrate the point : 
“Beginning with March 1, 1919, the right to possess women 
between the ages of 17 and 32 is abolished . . . this decree, 
however, not being applicable to women who have five chil- 
dren. ... By virtue of the present decree no woman can any 
longer be considered as private property and all women be- 
come the property of the nation. . . . The distribution and 
maintenance of nationalized women, in conformity with the 
decision of responsible organizations, are the prerogative of 
the group of Saralof anarchists. ... All women thus put at 
the disposition of the nation must, within three days after the 
publication of the present decree, present themselves in per- 
son at the address indicated and provide all necessary informa- 
tion. . . . Any man who wishes to make use of a nationalized 
woman must hold a certificate issued by the administrative 
Council of a professional union, or by the Soviet of workers, 
soldiers or peasants, attesting that he belongs to the working 
class. . . . Every worker is required to turn in 2% of his salary 
to the fund. . . . Male citizens not belonging to the working 
class may enjoy the same rights provided they pay a sum 
equivalent to 250 French francs, which will be turned over to 
the public fund. . . . Any women who by virtue of the present 


A Brief Critique 


decree will be declared national property will receive from the 
public fund a salary equivalent to 575 French francs a month. 
. . . Any pregnant woman will be dispensed of her duties for 
four months before and three months after the birth of the 
child. . . . One month after birth, children will be placed in 
an institution entrusted with their care and education. They 
will remain there to complete their instruction and education 
at the expense of the national fund until they reach the age of 
seventeen. . . . All those who refuse to recognize the present 
decree and to cooperate with the authorities shall be declared 
enemies of the people, anti-anarchists, and shall suffer the 
consequences.” 10 

Another document which illustrates the kind of “libera- 
tion” which women received under the Communist version 
of morality is contained in a decision handed down by a Soviet 
official in which he said : “There is no such thing as a woman 
being violated by a man ; he who says that a violation is wrong 
denies the October Communist Revolution. To defend a vio- 
lated woman is to reveal oneself as a bourgeois and a partisan 
of private property.” 11 

Only one other thought need be added concerning the 
Communist allegation that Judaic-Christian morals represent 
a “class” morality. That is the fact that not only is it quite 
simple to illustrate that such an allegation is untrue but it is 
also quite simple to illustrate that the most perfect example 
of “class” morality on the face of the earth today is Com- 
munism. Of the 180,000,000 people in Russia, only about 
3,000,000 are members of the Communist party. This small 
ruling minority ruthlessly compels the remainder of the 
people to accept its decision as to what is good and what is bad. 
Communist morals follow a simple formula. Anything which 
promotes the communist cause is good, anything which hinders 

10 Quoted, by Gabriel M. Roschini in his article, “contradictions con- 
cerning the status OF women in soviet RUSSIA,” which appears in 
“the philosophy of communism,” by Giorgio La Pira and others, 
Fordham University Press, New York, 1952, pp. 97-98. 

1 1 “OUTCHIT gazeta,” October 10, 1929. Quoted by Charles J. McFad- 
den in “the philosophy of communism,” pp. 292-293 and note. 


The Naked Communist 


it is bad. Upon examination, that philosophy turns out to be 
a code of opportunism and expediency, or a code of no morals 
at all. Anyone who does not conform to the dictates of the 
Party as to what is good for Communism and what is not, is 
subjected to the most severe penalties under Articles 131 and 
133 of the Soviet Constitution. Thus, the perfect example of 
“class” morality, which the Marxists attribute to the Judaic- 
Christian code, is to be found right in the Communist plan 
of action itself. 

The Communist Theory of Class Struggle 

fallacy 9 — The next fallacy is the claim of Marx and 
Engels that they had discovered the secret of human progress. 
This was identified by them as “class struggle.” 

As the student will recall, they said that when men be- 
came aware that slavery was a satisfactory mode of produc- 
tion, they built a society designed to protect the rights of the 
slave owner. They further believed that if this state of affairs 
had never been challenged the mode of production by slavery 
would have become a permanent fixture and society likewise 
would have been fixed. But Marx and Engels found, as do all 
students of history, that the economic order passed from slav- 
ery to feudalism and then from feudalism to capitalism. What 
caused this? They decided it was class struggle. They de- 
cided the slaves overthrew their masters and created a new 
mode of production based on feudalism. A society was then 
developed to protect this mode of production until the serfs 
overthrew their lords and set up a mode of production char- 
acterized by free-enterprise capitalism. Modern society, they 
said, is to protect capitalism. 

Critics declare that Marx and Engels apparently ignored 
some of the most obvious facts of history. For example, the 
decay and overthrow of ancient civilizations such as Egypt, 
Greece and Rome had nothing to do with slaves rising up 
against their masters: “The slaves of those days were for 
the most part subservient, abject, and helpless creatures, whose 


A Brief Critique 


occasional murmurings and rebellions were suppressed with 
horrible cruelty. Those were not class struggles of the imag- 
inary Marxian type and did not bring the transition to feudal- 
ism. Engels himself says that toward the end of the Roman 
Empire slaves were scarce and dear ; that the latifundia, which 
were great agricultural estates based on slave labor, were 
no longer profitable ; that small-scale farming by colonists and 
tenants was relatively lucrative; and that, in short, ‘slavery 
died because it did not pay any longer.’ Then came the bar- 
barian invasion, the downfall of Rome, and the establishment 
of feudalism as the result of the conquest of a higher civiliza- 
tion by a lower and not through the alleged driving force of a 
class struggle.” 12 

Similar historical problems exist for Marx and Engels in 
connection with the transition of society from feudalism to 
capitalism. 

FALLACY 10 — Not only does Communism fail in its at- 
tempt to account for past progress on the basis of class strug- 
gle, but it also fails in its prediction that class antagonism 
would increase under capitalism in the future. One hundred 
years have failed to develop the two violently antagonistic 
classes which Marx and Engels said were inevitable. 

Communist agitators have done everything in their power 
to fan the flame of artificial class-consciousness in the minds 
of the workers, but the basic struggle between labor and capi- 
tal has not been to overthrow capitalism but to get the workers 
a more equitable share of the fruits of capitalism. For ex- 
ample, during the past twenty years labor has attained a 
higher status in the United States than ever before. The 
Communists tried to seize leadership in this reform trend, but 
the more the workers earned the more independent they be- 
came — not only by asserting their rights in relation to their 
employers but also in discharging the Communist agitators 
from labor union leadership. Workers did not respond to the 
Communist call to overthrow capitalism, and Communist writ- 
ers have admitted this with some bitterness. 


12 LeRossignol, J. E., “from marx to stalin,” pp. 152-153. 


The Naked Communist 


At the same time, both governmental and industrial 
leaders generally developed the philosophy that strong buying 
power in labor is essential to keep the wheels of industry 
moving. Labor therefore came closer to assuming its proper 
role as an integral part of capitalism than ever before. This 
trend leaves Communism completely undone because such a 
development makes labor an indispensable part of capitalism 
rather than its class-conscious enemy. 

fallacy 11 — Another Communist premise which has 
failed is the assumption that under capitalism all wealth would 
be gradually monopolized until a handful of men would own 
everything and the exploited, propertyless class would be the 
overwhelming majority of mankind. Instead of growing, 
however, the propertyless proletariat actually have been de- 
creasing under capitalism. Marx wrote his massive tome on 
Capital while he was living in the most abject poverty. He 
looked upon the proletariat as those who were living under 
conditions similar to his own — people who had absolutely no 
property and no capital interests. Today, in the highly- 
developed capitalistic nation of the United States, the only 
people who could be classed as proletariat under Marx’s defini- 
tion would be those who own no land, have no savings deposits, 
no social security, no retirement benefits, no life insurance, no 
corporate securities and no government bonds, for all these 
represent the ownership of productive wealth or of money 
funds over and beyond the immediate needs of consumption. 
Such a class of propertyless proletariat does exist in the United 
States just as there has been one in all nations and in all ages, 
but the significant thing is that the proletariat in the United 
States is such a small minority that Marx would scarcely 
want to claim it. Under American capitalism wealth has 
been more widely distributed among the people than in any 
large nation in secular history. This has reduced the property- 
less class which Marx had in mind to little more than a fringe 
of the population. 

In contrast to this we find that the country which really 
does have the majority of its population in a class of property- 
less proletariat is the Motherland of Communism where the 


A Brief Critique 


Dictatorship of the Proletariat has been in force for over 
thirty-five years! 

FALLACY 12 — Marx’s theory on wages also collapsed with 
the passing of time. He assumed that technological devel- 
opments would make machines more and more efficient and 
therefore throw so many men out of work that they would 
compete for jobs until wages would become more and more 
meager. Technological development has actually created more 
jobs than it has destroyed and, except during intervals of 
depression, the long-range trend in capitalism has been to get 
closer and closer to the economic dream of “full-employment.” 

fallacy 13 — Since Marx believed that wages would be- 
come smaller and smaller he assumed that the only possible 
way to attain an adequate living would be by owning property. 
That is why he said the possession of property was the one 
thing which distinguished the proletariat from the exploiting 
class. This conclusion was another major error. Today some 
individuals may readily receive $10,000 a year for the sale of 
their labor services while others live on incomes of $2,500 de- 
rived from the ownership of property. In such cases it would 
certainly seem ludicrous to call the first group proletariat and 
the second group exploiting bourgeoisie. Under capitalism 
the ownership of property is certainly not the only means of 
gaining adequate economic independence. 

FALLACY 14 — Marx and Engels also failed in trying to 
predict what would happen to the middle class under capital- 
ism. They said the middle class would be forced to follow the 
dismal process of sinking back into the propertyless class so 
that ultimately there would be just two violently antagonistic 
classes — the capitalists and the propertyless proletariat. The 
very opposite happened. Economists have made studies which 
show that the middle class (consisting of people who are 
neither extremely prosperous nor exceptionally poor) has been 
rapidly growing. As a group the members of the middle class 
have increased in number, in wealth and in proportion to the 
rest of the population. 13 


11 Blodgett, Ralph E., “comparative economic systems,” p. 735. 


The Naked Communist 


fallacy 15 — Another fallacy in Communism is the theory 
that class struggle leads to “necessary progress.” In this 
theory Marx and Engels attempted to apply the dialectics 
of their philosophy which say that out of struggle between 
two opposing forces an inescapable new evolutionary advance- 
ment is made. This fails to explain the unprogressiveness 
which has characterized many nations for centuries — nations 
such as India, China, Egypt, Arabia and the populations in 
East Asia. 

It also fails to explain one of the most obvious facts of 
history, namely, the retrogression of civilizations. The whole 
pattern of human experience shows that nations rise to a 
summit of power and then pass through moral and intellectual 
decay to lose their cultural standing and economic predomi- 
nance. This is vastly easier to demonstrate in history than 
the theory that class struggle has lifted man through an 
ever-ascending series of stages called “necessary progress.” 

fallacy 16 — Finally, the failure of class struggle to ex- 
plain the past also failed Marx and Engels when they tried to 
predict what would happen in their own lifetime. They said 
that Communism would come first in those countries which 
were most highly capitalistic because the class struggle would 
become more sharply defined as capitalism increased. On this 
basis they thought Communism would come first in Germany. 14 
A few years later Marx shifted his prediction to England. 13 

It was ironical that Communism (at least the Dictatorship 
of the proletariat) should first come to Russia — a nation which 
in economic matters was one of the least developed among all 
the countries in Europe. Furthermore, Communism came as a 
coup in Russia, not through any class struggle on the part of 
the workers. It came through the conspiratorial intrigue of 
V. I. Lenin, who was encouraged by the German High Com- 
mand to go into Russia during the closing months of World 
War I and use a small, hard core of revolutionaries to seize the 
provisional government which had but recently forced the 
Tzar to abdicate and was at the moment representing the 


14 Marx and Engels, “the communist manifesto,” p. 58. 
is Marx is quoted by M. D’Arcy in “Christian morals,” p. 172. 


A Brief Critique 


working class, as much as anyone else, in setting up a demo- 
cratic constitution. 

Communism therefore did not come to Russia as the 
natural outcome of class struggle but like any other dictator- 
ship — by the military might of a small minority. This brings 
us to the fallacy of the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat.” 

The Dictatorship of the Proletariat 

fallacy 17 — This proposed monopoly of political and 
economic power was designed to do many things for the good of 
humanity, but experience has proven them to be false dreams. 
For example, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat was designed 
to spread the enjoyment of wealth among the people by abolish- 
ing private property and putting all means of production in 
the hands of the government. Why did they want to do this? 
They said it was to prevent all property and wealth from 
falling into the hands of private capitalists. But what hap- 
pened when the Communists attempted to do this in Russia? 
It destroyed what little division of wealth there was and sent 
the economy hurtling back in the direction of feudalism — an 
economic system under which a few privileged persons dis- 
pense the necessities of life by arbitrary determination while 
at the same time dictating the way in which all important 
phases of life shall be lived by the citizens. The folly of 
Marx and Engels was in failing to distinguish the difference 
between the right of private property and the abuse of private 
property. They were going to get rid of the abuse by abolish- 
ing the right. The problem of humanity has not been the 
right to own private property but how to provide an equitable 
distribution of property rights so that many people could en- 
joy them. Therefore, Communist theory does not solve the 
problem because of the simple fact that putting all property 
back under the supervision of the hirelings of a dictatorship 
launches a trend toward monopoly of property rather than 
toward a wider distribution of its enjoyment. 

fallacy 18 — The Dictatorship of the Proletariat was 


The Naked Communist 


also designed to compensate each man for work performed 
rather than for wages earned. But by abolishing wages in 
favor of labor certificates, Communist leaders were simply 
abandoning the prevailing medium of exchange. After the 
Communist revolution in Russia it was found that this idea 
forced that nation to resort to a primitive barter system. The 
whole idea was so disastrous that it had to be abandoned after 
a few months. The Communists learned that the problem of 
equalizing wages is not solved by abolishing wages per se. 

FALLACY 19 — The Dictatorship of the Proletariat was also 
intended to permit the creation of a huge “defense” army 
which would help “liberate” the proletariat in other nations 
until finally the Dictatorship would cover the entire earth. 

This veiled attempt to obscure the imperialistic ambitions 
of Communist leaders for world conquest is still employed. 
Their armies are always described as being for “defense” and 
the victims of their aggression as being “liberated.” Recent 
world history has provided a tragic commentary on the role 
of Communist liberation. 

FALLACY 20 — The Dictatorship of the Proletariat was 
further expected to give the Communist leaders time to dem- 
onstrate to the masses the effectiveness of their plan so as to 
insure a unity of support for “full communism” which was soon 
to follow. The Communist Dictatorship in Russia has had 
no such power to persuade. In fact, the violence which 
was authorized for use against the capitalist class has had to 
be turned loose with equal fury on the proletariat or working 
class so that today the masses have been reduced to a state of 
numb and fearful acquiescence rather than a “unity of sup- 
port” for the Communist cause. 

The Stateless, Classless Society Under 
Full Communism 

fallacy 21 — The Communist dream of a great new “one 
world” of the future is based on the belief that a regime of 
violence and coercion under the Dictatorship of the Proletariat 


A Brief Critique 


would permit the establishment of a society which would pro- 
duce a new order of men who would acquire the habit of ob- 
serving what Lenin called the “simple fundamental rules of 
every-day social life in common.” The fallacy of this hope lies 
in Communism’s perverted interpretation of human behavior. 
It assumes, on the basis of Dialectical Materialism, that if you 
change things outside of a man this automatically compels a 
change on the inside of the man. The inter-relation between 
environment on the outside and the internal make-up of man 
is not to be disputed, but environment only conditions man, 
it does not change his very nature. For example, just as men 
will always laugh, eat, propagate, gravitate into groups and 
explore the unknown, so likewise they will always enjoy the 
pleasure of possessing things (which alone gives pleasure to 
sharing) ; they will always possess the desire for individual 
expression or self-determination, the ambition to improve 
their circumstances and the motive to excel above others. 
These qualities are inherent in each generation and cannot be 
legislated away nor ignored. 

Therefore no amount of violence and coercion will ever 
develop permanent habits of observing the “simple funda- 
mental rules of every-day social life in common” if that social 
life violates the very nature of man. No matter how man is 
suppressed he will harbor in his very nature a passionate in- 
stinct for freedom to express these desires which are his by 
inheritance rather than by acquisition. That is why these 
desires cannot be ignored, and that is why they will not be 
annihilated even under the ruthless suppressions of a militant 
Dictatorship of the Proletariat. They will surely rise to assert 
themselves the very moment the dictatorship shows signs of 
“withering away.” 

Sixty centuries of history have demonstrated that society 
succeeds only when it tempers man’s natural instincts and in- 
clinations. In fact, these same qualities of human nature 
which Communism would try to abolish are the very things 
which, under proper circumstances, men find to be the sources 
of satisfaction, strength and well-being which lead to progress 
for both the individual and for society as a whole. 


The Naked Communist 


FALLACY 22 — Marx and Engels were so anxious to dis- 
credit capitalism that they spent most of their time on that 
particular theme and never got around to revealing the com- 
plete pattern for “full communism” which was to replace 
capitalism ; nevertheless, we do have sufficient information to 
reveal its congenital weaknesses. One of these is the axiom 
that “Each will produce according to his ability, each will 
receive according to his need.” This perhaps sounds excellent 
when one is dealing with a handicapped person, because society 
is willing to make up to an obviously handicapped person 
that which he cannot do for himself. But what happens when 
this is applied to the whole society? Recently a teacher 
asked his students what they thought about this Communist 
slogan, and they all seemed to think it was line. The teacher 
then said he would give them a little demonstration of what 
would happen in school if “each produced according to his 
capacity and each received according to his need.” Said he : 

“To get a passing grade in this class you must receive 75. 
Therefore, if any of you get 95 I will take off 20 points and 
give it to a student who only gets 55. If a student gets 90 
I will take off 15 points and give it to a student who only 
makes 60. In this way everyone will get by.” 

Immediately there was a storm of protest from the 
brighter, hard-working students in the class, but the lazy or 
less studious pupils throught it was fine idea. Finally the 
teacher explained: 

“In the long run I don’t think any of you would like this 
system. Here is what would happen. First, the highly pro- 
ductive pupils — and they are always a minority in school as 
well as in life — would soon lose all incentive for producing. 
Why strive to make a high grade if part of it is taken from 
you by ‘authority’ and given to someone else? Second, the 
less productive pupils — a majority in school as elsewhere — 
would, for a time, be relieved of the necessity to study or to 
produce. This would continue until the high producers had 
sunk or had been driven down to the level of the low producers 
and therefore had nothing to contribute to their companions. 
At that point, in order for anyone to survive, the ‘authority’ 


A Brief Critique 


would have no alternative but to begin a system of com- 
pulsory labor and punishments against even the low producers. 
They, of course, would then complain bitterly, but without 
understanding just what had happened.” 16 

In terms of Communism this need for “authority would 
simply mean returning to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
in order to force all workers to produce more of life’s necessi- 
ties. But the Dictatorship of the Proletariat fails, even with 
force, to make men produce according to their ability. As in 
the example cited by the school teacher, this is because Com- 
munism has deliberately destroyed the most ordinary work 
incentives. Let us list four of them : 

1. Increased reward for increased production. 

2. Increased reward for working harder to develop im- 
proved products. 

3. Increased reward for working harder to provide im- 
proved services. 

4. The right of the worker to buy and develop property 
with the accumulation of past rewards ( profits ) over 
and beyond the needs of consumption and thereby im- 
prove the circumstances of himself and his family. 

The Communist leaders seem to have misunderstood the 
universal lesson of life that man’s greatest enemy is inertia 
and that the mainspring of action to combat inertia is not 
force but the opportunity for self-improvement. Marx and 
Engels insisted that such an attitude is selfish and “non-social,” 
but the plain fact is that a worker finds it difficult to work 
harder in order to fill the stomachs of “society” when the fruits 
of his labor do not first take care of himself and his family. 
The Communists thought they could drive out this “non- 
social” attitude with force, but thirty-five years of Dictator- 
ship in Russia have vividly demonstrated that men will not 
work according to their ability unless they are compensated 
according to their ability. Even the Communist leaders know 


i« Related by Thomas J. Shelly, instructor in Economics and History, 
Yonkers High School, Yonkers, New York. 


The Naked Communist 


84 force has failed. Under the whip of the Dictatorship the work- 
ers have barely produced enough to survive. The Communist 
leaders therefore say that the Dictatorship must be continued 
indefinitely. So long as the workers fail to produce according 
to their ability there certainly can be no talk of “full Com- 
munism” where each will receive according to his need. 

FALLACY 23 — In studying the theories of Marx and En- 
gels the student soon becomes aware that they failed to 
take into account some of the most elementary facts of life. 
For example, they assumed that in a stateless society mass- 
rule (which always turns out to be mob-rule) would be more 
discriminating and discerning than the executive, legislative 
and judicial bodies of organized government. To set this up 
as an expectation under full Communism flies in the face of 
all past human experience. 

fallacy 24 — This theory also assumes that under the 
suppression imposed by the Dictatorship of the Proletariat men 
will lose or completely smother their instinct of acquisition. 
Marx and Engels make it clear that they expected the Dictator- 
ship to get people in the “habit” of not owning property or 
wanting to own it. But what happens when the stateless so- 
ciety is inaugurated and a whole new generation arrives on the 
scene which has no memory of the merciless suppression which 
gave their fathers the habit of observing the “simple, funda- 
mental rules of everyday social life in common”? Suppose large 
numbers refuse to do the kind of work or the share of work 
expected of them, so that they are adjudged guilty of not 
“producing according to their ability” ? Or suppose they de- 
mand from the classless, stateless society more than is believed 
to be their share? What will happen if they organize them- 
selves, secretly equip themselves with weapons, and rise up 
unexpectedly to seize the wealth which the classless, stateless 
society refuses to give them? Will it not be necessary to 
immediately set up the Dictatorship of the Proletariat all 
over again to suppress this opposition ? Perhaps the instinct 
of acquisition is going to be more difficult to suppress than 
Marx and Engels thought. In fact, with the knowledge which 
we already have concerning several thousand years of human 


A Brief Critique 


behavior, is it likely that Communism will ever get past the 
Dictatorship of the Proletariat? 

FALLACY 25 — Finally, full Communism promises that 
even in the absence of ordinary work incentives the classless, 
stateless society will produce greater quantities of goods than 
any existing system can produce today. Under this theory 
it is intended that Communist production will somehow reach 
a state of absolute saturation where all human needs will be 
satisfied. Supplies are to be stockpiled and distributed ac- 
cording to the needs of every person. Services are likewise 
to be made available at central depots and are to be available 
in such quantity that all elements of competition among con- 
sumers will be eliminated. Thus, Communism promises to do 
away with markets, money and prices. 

What happens, then, if the goal of absolute saturation 
is not reached? Would not the Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
have to be called into service once more to suppress dissatis- 
faction? A good example of the problem might be the case 
of automobiles. How many automobiles would have to be 
produced to reach absolute saturation for the wants (which 
must ultimately become synonymous with need if there is to 
be no state authority) of two billion people? Under capitalism, 
economic necessity makes a family feel satisfied with one 
or two cars. What would happen if this economic necessity 
were removed? Under full Communism a good worker is en- 
titled to all the cars he wants. Unless he gets all he wants 
the ogre of selfishness will raise its ugly head. Time and again 
Communist writings promise sufficient production to eliminate 
the element of selfishness which leads to class struggle. 

And what happens when new models come out? Will so- 
ciety automatically scrap all cars every time a new model is 
developed? Under full Communism who would want an old 
car? This may seem somewhat preposterous but, as a matter 
of fact, it would be a most commonplace problem and would 
arise in connection with all types of production. Someone 
would have to decide who must keep their old cars for an 
extra year or two since otherwise every family would most 
certainly demand a new one. Each family might even demand 


The Naked Communist 


several new ones. The problems under such a system obviously 
assume mountainous proportions and any hope of eliminating 
money, markets and prices fades into oblivion. Such a system 
also would require many times more government machinery 
than free-enterprise capitalism, and the prospect of producing 
goods and services in such quantities that the state might 
“wither away” defies both reason and experience. 

Communism as a Negative Approach 
To Problem-Solving 

In concluding this discussion of the basic fallacies in 
Communism we should perhaps make a summary comment 
on the most significant fallacy of them all. This is the Com- 
munist doctrine that problems can be solved by eliminating 
the institution from which the problems emanate. Even Marx 
and Engels may have been unaware that this was what they 
were doing, but the student will note how completely this 
approach dominates every problem they undertook to solve. 

Take, for example, the problems of government. Marx 
and Engels would solve these problems by working for the 
day when they could eliminate government. Problems of 
morals would be solved by doing away with morals. Prob- 
lems growing out of religion would be solved by doing away 
with religion. Problems of marriage, home and family would 
be eliminated by doing away with marriage, home and family. 
The problems arising out of property rights would be resolved 
by not allowing anyone to have any property rights. The 
problem of equalizing wages would be solved by abolishing 
wages. Problems connected with money, markets and prices 
would be solved by doing away with money, markets and 
prices. Problems of competition in production and distribu- 
tion would be solved by forcibly prohibiting competition. 
Finally, they would solve all the problems of modern society 
by using revolution to destroy this society. It seems the 
phantom of Communist hope can only arise from the bowels 


A Brief Critique 


of the earth through the ashes of all that now is. Communism 
must be built for one purpose — to destroy. Only after the 
great destruction did the Communist leaders dare to hope that 
they might offer to their disciples the possibility of freedom, 
equality and justice. 

It is this dismal and nebulous promise for the future 
which Communism offers the world today. Until such a day 
comes, the Communist leaders ask humanity to endure the 
conflagration of revolutionary violence, the suppression and 
liquidation of resistance groups, the expropriation of property, 
the Dictatorship of the Proletariat which they themselves de- 
scribe as “based on force and unrestricted by any laws,” the 
suspension of all civil liberties — suppression of free press, free 
speech and assembly, the existence of slave labor camps, the 
constant observation of all citizens by secret police, the long 
periods of service in the military, the poverty of collective 
farming, the risk of being liquidated if discovered associating 
with deviationists, and finally, the tolerance of an economic 
order which promises little more than a life of bare subsistence 
for generations to come. 

More than forty years have come and gone since Commu- 
nist leaders first seized a nation to demonstrate to a curious 
world what marvelous wonders might be wrought. From 
that one nation they have expanded their grip until one-third 
of the human race now bows to their iron-clad dictates. Those 
who have escaped their tyranny bear witness that Marxist 
Man has produced a political monstrosity containing the 
collected relics of practically every form of human degrada- 
tion and torture invented by the mind of man since the 
dawn of history. While pretending to liberate mankind from 
the alleged oppression of capitalism Marxist Man has defied the 
warm, white light of Twentieth Century civilization to intro- 
duce slavery on a scale unprecedented in the history of the 
race. While claiming to foster the “rights of the common 
man” the Marxist has butchered his fellow citizens from Ku- 
laks to aristocrats in numbers that baffle rational comprehen- 
sion. And while describing himself as the epitome of the best in 


The Naked Communist 


nature — the creature of science, the supreme intelligence of the 
universe — Homo-Marxian has exploited his cunning to com- 
pound crimes which scarcely would be duplicated by the most 
predatory tribes of pre-historic times. 

It is for this reason that discerning men have described 
Communism as reversing and negating history. It has turned 
man against himself. Instead of solving the many complex 
problems of modern life, Marxism’s negative approach has 
simply resurrected primitive problems which past generations 
of struggling humanity had already succeeding in solving. 

To more fully appreciate precisely what has been happen- 
ing we shall now examine the circumstances which led to the 
launching of the first Communist controlled nation in the his- 
tory of the world. 



V 

The Rise of the 

Revolutionary Movement in Russia 

The events described in this chapter are intimate facts in the 
minds of all well-informed Marxists. Communists often base 
their arguments on their interpretation of these events and 
therefore the student should find this historical background 
helpful. 

This chapter also includes the biographies of the princi- 
pal Communist leaders — Nikolai (V. I.) Lenin, Leon Trotsky 
and Joseph Stalin. 

A review of the following questions will indicate some of 
the answers which this chapter is designed to provide. 

Who launched Marxism in Russia in 1868? Why did 
Marx consider this man his “enemy”? After the assassina- 
tion of Alexander II what did Marx say about the possibility of 
a Communist revolution in Russia? 

What kind of environment produced Nikolai Lenin? Why 
was his brother hanged? 

Who organized the Bolsheviks? What does the name 


The Naked Communist 


mean? What did they call their enemies? Was this an ac- 
curate designation or a matter of strategy? 

What was the background of Leon Trotsky? How did he 
get this name? How did he escape from Siberia? Why did 
he oppose Lenin in 1903? 

Was the Russian Revolution of 1905 led by a few radicals 
or was it a general uprising of the whole people? Why did 
Lenin and the Bolsheviks oppose the “October Manifesto” 
which promised the people representative government? 

From what kind of home did Joseph Stalin come? Why 
was he expelled from the seminary where he was being trained 
as a priest? What did the criminal activities of Joseph Stalin 
during 1907 reveal about his personality? How extensive were 
Stalin’s activities as a union organizer, propagandist and 
revolutionary leader during this period? What was his re- 
lationship to Lenin? 

What brought Russia to the brink of another general 
uprising during the First World War? What was the Tsar’s 
attitude during this crisis? 

Marxism Comes to Russia 

In 1885 a U.S. citizen, Andrew D. White, returned from 
a tour of duty as attache in the American Embassy at St. 
Petersburg and described the Russian situation as follows: 
“The whole governmental system is the most atrociously bar- 
barous in the world. There is on earth no parallel example 
of a polite society so degraded, a people so crushed, an official 
system so unscrupulous.”' 

When White made this statement, the population of 
Russia was slightly over 70,000,000. Of these, 46,000,000 
were in virtual captivity as serfs. 

It will be recalled that Marx and Engels had been aroused 
to wrathful vehemence when they saw conditions among the 


1 From a letter of Andrew D. White dated at Berlin, November 9, 
1985, in the White Collection, Cornell University. 


The Revolution in Russia 


industrial workers of England, but the status of life among 
the English was far above that of the peasants in Russia. The 
Russian serfs were not only starved, exploited and pauperized, 
but they were subjected to an iron-clad system of feudal po- 
litical suppression. Always there was the plague of the secret 
police, the threat of arrest and sentencing to forced labor 
camps in Siberia and the cruel indecencies imposed upon them 
by the Tsar’s everpresent military. A Russian serf seemed 
to enjoy no sacred immunities whatever, neither in his person, 
his possessions, his children, nor, sometimes, his wife. All 
were subject to the petty whims of grasping officials in the 
Tsar’s corrupt bureaucracy. 

Between 1861 and 1866, Tsar Alexander II sincerely at- 
tempted to do away with the institution of serfdom by ap- 
proving several acts of emancipation. However, for all practi- 
cal purposes, the impoverished lives of the peasants continued 
to be insecure, harsh and austere. Circumstances leading to 
a revolution were in the making. 

Marxism came to Russia in 1868 when Bakunin’s trans- 
lation of Capital escaped the Tsar’s censors and passed 
among liberals and radicals like a choice morsel of spiritual 
meat. For Russia it meant the kindling of the bright red flame 
in the original Communist Manifesto : “Let the ruling classes 
tremble at a Communist revolution. The proletarians have 
nothing to lose but their chains. . . . Working men of all coun- 
tries, unite !” 

Russian revolutionary movements soon began to take 
shape and by 1880 Marxism could be described as definitely 
taking hold. The first significant violence came in 1881 when 
Tsar Alexander II fell dying beneath the shattering impact of 
a bomb which was hurled into the royal carriage by Ignatius 
Grinevitsky, a member of a revolutionary group called “The 
People’s Will.” 

The successful murder of the Tsar led many Marxists 
to feel that the hour for unrestricted revolution might be very 
near. Over in London, the aging Marx began receiving in- 
quiries from his Russian disciples. They wanted to know 
whether or not it might be possible to have a revolution in 


The Naked Communist 


Russia even though the Russian economy had never passed 
through the capitalistic development which Marx had always 
said was a prerequisite. Marx studied the problem diligent- 
ly. Finally, he gave it as his opinion that Russia had “the 
rarest and most suitable opportunity ever offered to any 
country to avoid (skip) the phase of capitalistic development.” 
In other words, Marx was suggesting the possibility of an 
early revolution in Russia. 

This was a complete theoretical switch for Marx. He 
was also admitting the error of one of his earlier prophecies; 
namely, that the revolution would come first among highly 
developed capitalistic nations such as Germany and England. 
Among his friends he declared: “It is an irony of fate that 
the Russians, whom I have fought for twenty-five years, and 
not only in German (publications), but in French and English, 
have always been my patrons.” It was indeed ironical that 
the Russian Marxists had remained loyal to Marx and his 
theories in spite of the verbal and editorial abuse he had 
heaped upon them. This was never more true than in the 
case of Bakunin, the first Russian Marxist, who promoted 
the theories of Marx and Engels with such zeal that they both 
feared he might take over the First International. They, 
therefore, marked him for political liquidation. 

Even at the end, however, Bakunin reaffirmed his faith 
in Marxism, and after referring to the “furious hatred” of 
Marx toward himself, he concluded: “This has given me an 
intense loathing of public life. I have had enough of it, and 
after devoting all my days to the struggle, I am weary. . . . 
Let other and younger persons put their hands to the work. 
For my own part, I no longer feel strong enough. ... I, there- 
fore, withdraw from the arena, and ask only one thing of my 
dear contemporaries — oblivion.” 

In 1876 Bakunin laid down the burden of his life, but the 
“younger persons” to whom he bequeathed Marxism and the 
Russian people’s revolution were already commencing to make 
their appearance among men. 

In 1870, Nikolai Lenin was born, and in the year 1879, 
there arrived on earth both Joseph Stalin and Leon Trotsky. 


The Revolution in Russia 


Others would come, but these three were to be the principal 
leaders in carrying forward the traditions of Bakunin and 
at the same time doing for Marx what he was never able to do 
for himself; these three would convulse a great nation in a 
revolution and would serve as midwives at the birth of the 
world’s first Communist dictatorship. 

The Early Life of Nikolai ( V. I . ) Lenin 

Marx would hardly have guessed that the first Com- 
munist dictator would be a man like Lenin, who was born on 
April 22, 1870, in Simbirsk, on the Volga. His father was a 
Councilor of State with an hereditary title of nobility while 
his mother was a German of the Lutheran faith. Lenin had 
red hair, high cheek bones, and the slanting eyes of his Tartar 
ancestors from Astrakhan. 

Originally, Lenin was named Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov, 
but “Nikolai Lenin” is the revolutionary pseudonym under 
which he became famous. As a boy he had strict training 
under a father who was called a “liberal” even though he was 
a Councilor of State. His father was a man of humanitarian 
ideals who worked himself to death setting up four-hundred 
and fifty primary schools during a period of seventeen years. 
Lenin was fifteen when his father died, and soon afterwards an 
even greater tragedy struck the family — his older brother 
was hanged. 

This brother, named Alexander, was nearing twenty-one. 
He had lost his religious faith some time before and had be- 
come deeply impressed with the philosophy of materialism. 
He had also come to feel the need for direct and decisive action 
in getting social reforms in Russia. 

While attending the University at St. Petersburg (now 
Leningrad) , Alexander agreed with several associates to con- 
struct a bomb which could be used to kill Tsar Alexander III. 
The bomb was built inside a bogus medical dictionary and 
consisted of dynamite and strychnine-treated bullets. The 
police discovered the assassination plot just before it was to 


The Naked Communist 


have been executed and the entire group was summarily ar- 
rested. Trials and convictions soon followed, and in May, 
1887, the St. Petersburg papers announced that Lenin’s older 
brother had gone to the gallows. 

When the excitement subsided, Lenin, who had just turned 
17, went back to reading Marx and other revolutionary writ- 
ers in deadly earnest. Like his brother, Lenin had lost his 
religious faith two or three years before and was becoming 
reconciled to the cynicism of the Marxist interpretation of life. 
Furthermore, the death of his brother accelerated his deter- 
mination to become an active revolutionist as soon as possible. 

To give himself some kind of professional status, Lenin 
made an intensive study of law. Through the intercession of 
his mother, he was allowed to take his final examinations at 
the Univerity in St. Petersburg and came out first among one 
hundred and twenty-four students. Lenin then attempted to 
practice law, but for some reason lost nearly all his cases and, 
therefore, abandoned the law and never returned to it. 

In 1891-92 the Russian famine and cholera epidemic 
broke out. Lenin was living in a region where Tolstoy, the 
famous Russian writer and philanthropist, was trying to sus- 
tain the courage of the people by organizing hundreds of soup- 
kitchens and distributing seed-grain and horses to the im- 
poverished peasants. But Lenin would have none of it. He 
would not help set up soup-kitchens nor join a relief committee. 
Later he was accused of welcoming the famine as a means of 
accentuating the suffering of the people and firing up their 
revolutionary will to act. There is no doubt that during these 
years the Marxist program was ramrodding Lenin’s thinking 
into that of an uncompromising revolutionist. 

Shortly after this, Lenin took up residence in St. Peters- 
burg. He was now twenty-three and anxious to begin active 
revolutionary work. He therefore joined the “Fighting Union 
for the Liberation of the Working Class.” However, in 1895 
Lenin learned that he had tuberculosis of the stomach. This 
made it necessary for him to go to Switzerland and undergo 
a cure at a special sanitarium. While in Western Europe, he 
made contact with George Plekhanov, the leader of the exiled 


The Revolution in Russia 


Russian Marxists. Lenin spent long hours with Plekhanov 
and felt highly flattered that the big man among the exiled 
Russian radicals would share with a newcomer his plans for 
a violent revolution and the overthrow of the Tsar. Plek- 
hanov was equally impressed with Lenin. He felt the heat of 
Lenin’s glowing hatred for everything tainted by the Tsar’s 
regime, and therefore decided that Lenin should return to 
Russia, rally the Marxists, and organize a national Com- 
munist political party patterned after the highly success- 
ful Social Democrats in Germany. Lenin was also asked to 
begin publishing a revolutionary periodical. 

This assignment was accepted by Lenin as a heroic 
mission for which fate had predestined him. Upon returning 
to Russia, he organized strikes, trained recruits, formulated 
political strategy and wrote inflammatory articles. But in the 
midst of this promising campaign, a police agent betrayed the 
group and Lenin found himself sentenced to exile in faraway 
Siberia. Lenin accepted this interruption of his revolutionary 
career with bitter resignation. 

Soon after his arrival in Siberia Lenin was joined by a 
Marxist girl, whom he had met in 1894, named Nadezhda 
Krupskaya. She was allowed to come, at Lenin’s request, on 
condition that she and Lenin legalize their union with a mar- 
riage ceremony. This violated their Marxist principle of 
“abolition of the family,” but they consented in order to re- 
main together. Lenin now had a companion as dedicated to 
the revolution as himself. They had no children, and close 
associates stated that they intentionally planned against chil- 
dren because they both felt their missions in life would not 
permit them to be thus encumbered. 

Lenin spent his time in Siberia studying, writing reams 
of letters in secret ink, solidifying the program of the new 
Social-Democratic Party of Russia and completing his book 
called, Capitalism in Russia. 

When he was released in 1900, Lenin had become a cau- 
tious, calculating, full-fledged, conspiratorial revolutionist. He 
immediately headed for Munich, Germany, where he started 
printing a paper called The Spark, which could be smuggled 


The Naked Communist 


into Russia. Thus began seventeen years of almost continuous 
exile in Western Europe for Lenin and his wife. Only on rare 
occasions did they secretly visit Russia. They lived modestly 
and traveled light. It was as though they were waiting for 
the voice of history to assign them to their revolutionary roles. 


Origin of the Bolsheviks 

By 1903 Lenin and his wife had set up headquarters in 
London. They had the feeling they were carrying on where 
Marx had left off. Marx had been dead seventeen years and 
often they made pilgrimages to the cemetery where the grave 
of Marx is located. 

In July of that year a Russian-Social-Democratic congress 
convened in London. Forty-three delegates came from Russia 
as well as from various groups of Russian exiles in Western 
Europe. As chairman of the congress, Lenin started off with 
a moderate and impartial attitude, but as the discussions con- 
tinued he was horrified to discover that the congress was 
moving toward pacifistic socialism rather than militant revolu- 
tion. Lenin immediately gathered his friends and followers 
around him. He split the congress wide open on the issue of 
whether party membership should be limited to hard-core 
revolutionists (as advocated by Lenin) or broadened to in- 
clude anyone who felt a sympathy for the movement. 

In this dispute Lenin temporarily rallied around him a 
majority of the congress and thereafter used this as a basis 
for calling those who supported him “Bolsheviks” (which 
comes from a Russian word meaning “majority”), while those 
who opposed him were called “Mensheviks” (which is taken 
from the Russian word meaning “minority”). The propagan- 
da value of a party title meaning “majority” will be quickly 
recognized. It was another illustration of Lenin’s absolute 
determination to exploit every situation so as to make it a tool 
to further his over-all political strategy. 

At this particular congress, however, Lenin’s victory was 
short-lived. Several groups combined their strength against 


The Revolution in Russia 


him and before long he found himself representing the minor- 
ity view on most matters. Nevertheless, Lenin continued call- 
ing his followers “the Bolsheviks” and any who opposed him 
“the Mensheviks.” 


Background of Leon Trotsky 


One of those who now opposed Lenin was a young, 
twenty-three-year-old zealot named Leon Trotsky. At a future 
day Lenin and Trotsky would join forces, but at this congress 
of 1903 they stood in opposite camps. Let us pause in our 
narration to consider briefly the early life of Trotsky. 

In many respects the background of Lenin and Trotsky 
was similar. Both had come from substantial families, both 
had been well-educated, both had become disillusioned and 
had engaged in revolutionary activity and both had served 
sentences in Siberia. 

Leon Trotsky had been born to the name of Lev Bronstein. 
His father was a Kulak or rich peasant. Originally, Trotsky’s 
father had been a fugitive from the Tsar’s anti-Jewish cam- 
paign and had fled from city life to settle in a farming dis- 
trict near the Black Sea, where there was more religious 
tolerance. However, as the members of the family prospered, 
they gradually dropped the local synagogue as well as the 
observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Finally, the father came 
out openly in favor of atheism. 

When Trotsky went away to school, he carried along with 
him these sympathies for materialism which he had gained 
from his father. These attitudes soon began to bear fruit. 
Toward the completion of his school, Trotsky was not only 
exhibiting the cynicism of a confirmed materialist, but he was 
also showing strong signs of becoming a political radical. 
Although this tendency was most displeasing to Trotsky’s 
father, nothing would dissuade him. Boisterous scenes erupt- 
ed between the two whenever Trotsky went home for vacations 
and after a few years Trotsky was completely alienated from 
his family. 


The Naked Communist 


Under these circumstances it was not at all difficult for 
Trotsky to find a place in his mind for Marxism when it was 
finally presented to him. His conversion was further facili- 
tated by the fact that he was taught Marxism by an attractive 
young woman six years his senior whom he later married. Her 
name was Alexandra Lvovna. 

Trotsky was only nineteen when he and Alexandra decided 
to help organize the South Russian Workers’ Union. Among 
other things, Trotsky was assigned the task of printing 
an illegal paper. As might have been expected, this soon led 
to his arrest. Trotsky spent the next three months in solitary 
confinement and after a series of assignments to various 
prisons, he ended up in Siberia where he was joined eventually 
by Alexandra. They were both sentenced to serve four years 
in a cold, barren region where there were few settlements. 
Two children were born to them during this exile. 

Trotsky escaped in 1902 by burying himself in a peasant’s 
load of hay. He reached the Siberian railroad and then used 
a fake identification paper to pass himself off as “Trotsky” — 
the name of his late jailer! He used this name from then on. 
With the help of several Marxist comrades, he made his way 
to London and arrived there in time to participate in the 
Social-Democratic Congress which we have already mentioned. 
Sometime later he was joined by his wife and children. 

Upon their first meeting Lenin and Trotsky struck it off 
well. Lenin described Trotsky as a revolutionist of “rare 
abilities.” Trotsky reciprocated by suggesting that Lenin be 
made the chairman of the congress. During the congress, 
however, Trotsky saw enough of Lenin to make him appre- 
hensive about the cold, blue-steel razor edge of Lenin’s mind. 
He was shocked by the reckless indifference Lenin exhibited 
as he lopped off some of the oldest and most respected mem- 
bers of the party when they opposed his views. (Trotsky’s 
gentle concern for the feelings of fellow comrades in 1903 
stands in sharp contrast to his position in 1917-1922 when he 
personally supervised the ruthless liquidation of many hun- 
dreds of comrades whom he suspected of deviating from es- 
tablished party policy.) 


The Revolution in Russia 


As it turned out, Trotsky’s temporary opposition to Lenin 
in 1903 did not hurt his revolutionary career. In the years 
immediately following, Trotsky developed into a brilliant 
writer and public speaker and he became a well-known per- 
sonality in Western Europe long before Lenin. He is described 
as a handsome, arrogant, anti-social intellectual who some- 
times offended his fellow-Marxists because of his flare for 
elegant clothes. The down-sweep of his nose and moustache 
won for him the title of “The Young Eagle.” 

Now let us return to the swift course of events in the 
history of the Russian revolutionary movement. 

The Russian Revolution of 1905 

By 1903 the political situation in Russia had become ex- 
plosive. Tsar Nicholas II did not realize it, but he was to be 
the last of the Tsars. As an administrator, he had turned out 
to be amazingly weak. When he was a young man he had been 
very pleasant and friendly, and Russian liberals had hoped 
that after he ascended the throne he would adopt the badly 
needed reforms which his country required in order to take its 
place among the progressive nations of the world. But in 
this they were disappointed. Nicholas II perpetuated the 
imperialistic policies of his father, Alexander III, and enforced 
the stringent domestic policies of his grandfather who was 
assassinated. In fact, to satisfy his own expansive ambitions, 
Nicholas II plunged Russia into a senseless war with Japan 
in 1903. Almost immediately he found the Russian forces 
suffering humiliating defeat. 

This Russo-Japanese War lasted a little over two years 
and as it neared its mortifying conclusion, the economic and 
political pressure on the Russian people split the seams of the 
Empire asunder. Government officials were assassinated, 
mass demonstrations were held, and a general strike was 
called which eventually idled more than 2,500,000 workers. 
The Tsar used every form of reprisal available to suppress the 


The Naked Communist 


uprising, but mass arrests, mass imprisonment, and mass exe- 
cutions failed to stem the tide. The entire population was up in 
arms; bankers, peasants, professors, and illiterates walked 
side by side in the demonstration parades. 

A typical example of the Tsar’s clumsy maneuvering 
which brought on the revolution was the Winter Palace Massa- 
cre. This event occurred on Sunday, January 22, 1905, when 
a priest named Father George Gapon led a parade of several 
thousand unarmed workers to the front of the Winter Palace 
to present a peaceful petition for the amelioration of labor 
conditions. As the marchers drew near they could be seen 
carrying large portraits of Nicholas II which they waved 
back and forth while lustily singing “God Save the Tsar.” It 
was a strange scene. The obvious poverty of the workers 
stood out in vivid contrast to the magnificent splendor of the 
Tsar’s Winter Palace, which was a large and extravagant 
structure capable of housing more than 6,500 guests in its 
richly decorated apartments. 

But the Tsar did not come out to welcome them. Instead 
the marchers found the palace completely surrounded by 
massed troops. At first the workers were apprehensive about 
the situation, but they felt reassured when there was no com- 
mand to disperse. Then suddenly they heard the hoarse shout 
of a staccato military command. Immediately the Tsar’s 
troops opened direct fire on the crowd. The withering volley 
leveled the front ranks to the ground while the remaining 
marchers trampled one another as they fled in terror trying 
to escape. The troops continued firing until the crowd com- 
pletely dispersed. Approximately 500 were killed outright 
and 3,000 were wounded. This became notorious in Russian 
history as “Bloody Sunday.” 

News of this atrocity spread like a tidal wave across the 
steppes and plains of Russia. Already the people were bristling 
with resentment against the burden of the Russo-Japanese 
War, and this new outrage was sufficient to trigger a uni- 
versal revolt. At first a few of the people tried to use 
violence, but generally speaking, the principal method of re- 
taliation was one which paralyzed the Tsar’s wartime econ- 


The Revolution in Russia 


omy — the people stopped working. In a matter of months the 
entire economic machinery of Russia came to a standstill. 
Factories were closed, stores were empty, newspapers were 
not printed, dry-goods and fuel were not moved and newly 
harvested crops were left rotting on the loading docks. For 
the first time in his career, Tsar Nicholas II was deeply fright- 
ened. He abandoned the Russo-Japanese War and agreed to 
hear the people’s demands. 

These consisted of four things: 

1. Protection of the individual, allowing freedom of con- 
science, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and 
the right to form unions. 

2. The right of the people of all classes to vote for the 
Duma ( the people’s assembly.) 

3. The automatic repeal of any law enacted by the Tsar 
without the consent of the people’s assembly. 

4. The right of the people’s assembly to pass on the 
legality of any decrees issued by the Tsar. 

These demands were set in a document called “The 
October Manifesto.” This Manifesto clearly illustrates that 
the masses of the people had no intention of destroying the 
Tsar, but merely wanted to set up a limited monarchy similar 
to England. Such a compromise infuriated the Marxists. 
They wanted the revolution continued until the Tsar was forced 
to surrender unconditionally and abdicate. Not until then 
could they set up a Communist dictatorship. 

Leon Trotsky, who had hastened to Russia when the up- 
rising started, stood before a crowd of people who were 
celebrating the Tsar’s acceptance of the Manifesto and tore 
up a copy of it, declaring that the Manifesto was a betrayal 
of the revolution. He immediately joined with other Marxists 
in setting up political machinery to fan the flame of renewed 
revolutionary activity. This was done primarily by organizing 
a great many soviets (workers’ councils in the various labor 
unions). Lenin arrived belatedly in November, 1905, and 
agreed to join with Trotsky for a “a second revolution.” 

After sixty days, however, the Marxist movement col- 


The Naked Communist 


lapsed. Trotsky was caught and arrested while Lenin fled in 
the night to safer regions. 

Thus ended fourteen months of desperate revolt against 
the Tsar; the first twelve belonged to the whole people, the 
last two to the Marxists. Altogether, the troops throughout 
the Empire had been called out more than 2,500 different 
times. In these battles between the people and the troops, 
fourteen thousand had been killed, approximately one thou- 
sand had been executed, twenty thousand had been wounded or 
injured, and seventy thousand had been arrested. 

Trotsky’s leadership in the final stages of the revolution 
won him a stiff sentence from the Tsar’s court. He was con- 
victed of revolutionary violence and exiled to Siberia for an 
indefinite period. But Trotsky never reached Siberia. He 
made a daring escape in midwinter and, after traveling four 
hundred and thirty miles in a deer-sleigh, crossed the Ural 
Mountains on horseback and then escaped to Finland where he 
joined Lenin and several other Marxists. 

It was while Trotsky was staying in Finland that he 
carefully worked out his theory of “Perpetual Revolution.” 
This theory advocated a continuous Communist attack on all 
existing governments until they were overthrown and the dic- 
tatorship of the proletariat established. This brought 
Trotsky into nearly perfect focus with Lenin. Perhaps, with- 
out quite realizing it, he had talked himself into becoming a 
full-fledged Bolshevik. 

At this particular time, the Bolshevik movement was at 
its lowest ebb. The Bolshevik leaders had failed in their 
promises to force the Tsar to abdicate, and their continuation 
of the revolution after the October Manifesto had embittered 
the Tsar to the point where he had practically repudiated the 
Manifesto. He allowed the people to elect a Duma (people’s 
assembly) but he managed to strip it of all its real powers. 
The people knew they were being defrauded, but there was 
no way to enforce the Manifesto without fomenting another 
revolution, and at the moment this seemed unlikely. Indi- 
vidual groups did continue agitating against the Tsar and his 


The Revolution in Russia 


ministers, but most of these, like the Bolshevik leaders, were 
forced to flee to Western Europe for safety. 

To rejuvenate the dwindling influence of the Bolshevik 
Party, Lenin began holding a series of meetings. At one of 
these conclaves, a new revolutionary figure appeared on the 
scene. It was Joseph Stalin. Stalin came as an obscure dele- 
gate from a small Bolshevik group in Transcaucasia. Lenin 
immediately recognized him as a true revolutionary member 
of the peasant class — a rough, unrelenting, two-fisted man of 
ruthless action. Lenin had a place for such a personality and 
therefore enlisted Stalin in his service. 

This brings us to the third important personality who 
figured prominently in the revolutionary movement in Russia. 

Background of Joseph Stalin 

Joseph Stalin was originally named Djugashvili. He was 
born December 21, 1879, in the little town of Gori near the 
border of Turkey. Today the humble wooden house which 
first sheltered him has been made into a national monument 
with a marble canopy covering it. 

Stalin’s father was a shoemaker with an addiction for 
alcohol which eventually cost him his life. Stalin was only 
eleven years old when his father died. Thereafter, Stalin’s 
mother washed, scrubbed, sewed, and baked to earn enough 
money to put Stalin through school. Since his mother wanted 
him to be a priest, he was enrolled in the nearby theological 
seminary at Tiflis. As he learned his way around, Stalin 
soon discovered that the seminary was honeycombed with 
secret societies. Many of them were fostering the atheistic 
writings of Feuerbach and Bauer and the revolutionary writ- 
ings of Marx and Engels. Before long Stalin convinced him- 
self that he had a preference for revolution rather than 
religion and he therefore became vigorously active in the 
clandestine organizations which existed among the students 
of the seminary. He continued these activities for nearly three 


The Naked Communist 


years, but he was finally exposed in May, 1899, and was 
expelled from the seminary for “lack of religious vocation.” 

Once he joined the outside world, Stalin spent his full 
time as a professional Marxist revolutionary. He organized 
strikes, conducted illegal May Day festivities, and finally 
fled to Batumi where he became the principal labor agitator 
for the Social-Democratic party. Eventually he was arrested 
and after remaining in prison until 1903, he was sentenced 
to three years of exile in Siberia. 

He was still in Siberia when he heard about the split be- 
tween the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. Stalin almost in- 
stinctively felt himself to be a hard-core Bolshevik and after 
successfully escaping from Siberia the following year, he 
returned to Tiflis and became the leader of the Transcaucasian 
Bolsheviks. During the Revolution of 1905 he led an abortive 
revolution in his home province of Georgia and then departed 
immediately for Finland to attend a Bolshevik conference and 
make contact with Lenin. 

From then on Stalin remained the aide-de-camp to Lenin 
whom he deeply admired. It was not long before his zeal for 
the Communist cause began to forcefully manifest itself. 


Stalin Engages in Criminal Activities 


In the sumer of 1907 Joseph Stalin held a secret meet- 
ing with Lenin in Berlin. Afterwards he returned to Tiflis 
and organized a holdup. It was no mere Robin Hood adven- 
ture to steal money from the rich, but a major gangster opera- 
tion with complete disregard for the lives of men, women, 
and children in Stalin’s own home-town. 

A powerful bomb was thrown in front of a convoy carry- 
ing money from the post office to the Tiflis Branch of the 
State Bank. The bomb destroyed the horses pulling the car- 
riage, killed several by-standers, and wounded more than fifty 
children and adults. In the hysteria which followed, the 
moneybags containing 341,000 rubles (about $170,000) were 


The Revolution in Russia 


snatched from the carriage by the bomb-throwers and hur- 
riedly carried away. 

The crime reflected such complete disregard for human 
life that authorities both inside and outside of Russia at- 
tempted to run down every possible clue which would disclose 
the identities of the criminals. Finally, the money was found 
in the possession of a close associate of Stalin named Maxim 
Litvinov (the man Stalin later sent to the United States in 
1933 to seek U.S. recognition for Soviet Russia) . Litvinov and 
a companion were arrested in Paris by the French author- 
ities when they tried to change the rubles into francs before 
sending the money on to Lenin. Details of the crime were 
finally unraveled by the authorities, and the names of original 
perpetrators were disclosed. Nevertheless, Stalin succeeded in 
remaining at large for several more years and continued his 
revolutionary activities. 


Stalin as a Union Organizer, Writer 
and Bolshevik Leader 

The years 1907-1913 were pick-and-shovel years for 
Joseph Stalin. No one could accuse him of being merely an 
“intellectual Communist” as they sometimes described Lenin. 
Stalin learned every trick of propaganda, pressure politics, 
mass communications, strike techniques and labor agitation. 
Some of his most significant experiences occurred in the high- 
ly active industrial district at Baku. There he was assigned to 
organize tens of thousands of oil well and refinery workers. 
To do this he set up a triple-system of legal, semi-legal, and 
totally illegal organizations. He imposed his leadership so 
completely on the workers in this large industrial center that 
he was able to organize a powerful industrial soviet (workers’ 
council) dominated from top to bottom by his own loyal 
Bolshevik colleagues. 

Stalin was never very effective as a speaker because of 
his strong Georgian accent, but between 1907 and 1913, he 


The Naked Communist 


became proficient as a revolutionary writer. For awhile he 
edited a Socialist newspaper in Tiflis called Dio (Time) in 
which he aroused astonishment even among Bolsheviks be- 
cause of his bitterness in attacking the Mensheviks. In 1910 
he went to St. Petersburg (now Leningrad) and wrote for the 
Social Democrat, the Zvezda (Star), and later for Pravda 
(Truth). It was in these periodicals that Joseph Djugashvili 
first became known by his pen name, “Man of Steel,” or Stalin. 

In 1912 Stalin received special recognition when Lenin 
broke away completely from the Social Democrats and set 
up an independent Bolshevik Party. In the new organization 
Lenin appointed Stalin to the Central Committee. 

The very next year, however, Stalin’s career was inter- 
rupted when he was arrested and sent to Siberia. For Stalin 
it was an old story. Since 1903 he had been arrested eight 
times, exiled seven times, and escaped six times. But there 
was to be no escape on this latest arrest. He was sent to one of 
the most remote regions of Siberia. And with the arrival of 
World War I, Stalin had no particular desire to escape. He 
told his friends he would relax and enjoy his “vacation” in 
Siberia since escape might result in his being drafted into the 
armed services. He wanted no part of military service. 


The Role of Russia in World War I 

It will be recalled that the year 1914 found all the major 
nations of Europe flexing their military muscles. It was 
inevitable that the slightest miscalculation in diplomatic rela- 
tions might turn loose a churning volcano of human destruc- 
tion. The spark in the powder keg was the assassination of 
the heir to the Austria-Hungarian throne by a member of a 
Serbian secret society. This occurred June 28, 1914. Austria- 
Hungary had been looking for an excuse to take over Serbia, 
and therefore her troops began marching in. This angered 
the Tsar because Serbia was on his own calendar of conquest so 
he declared war on Austria-Hungary. Germany came to the 


The Revolution in Russia 


defense of Austria-Hungary and declared war on Russia. At 
the time France was an ally of Russia, so Germany used this 
as an excuse to declare war on France. This brought England 
into the War as an ally of France. Thus the machine of war 
began to roll. 

From the point of view of the Russian Tsar, the First 
World War did not come as any particular surprise. For 
years he had been busily preparing for it by building a power- 
ful military machine. Nevertheless, the Russian people were 
not psychologically prepared for war. For nearly a decade 
there had been a growing tension between the people and 
the Tsar because he had failed to provide them with the 
constitutional government which he had promised in the Oc- 
tober Manifesto of 1905. Of course, when the people were 
threatened by attack at the outbreak of World War I, they 
instinctively banded together in the common defense, and Tsar 
Nicholas promptly took this as an omen that they would sup- 
port him loyally throughout the conflict. 

But within a few months the strain of war began to tell. 
By 1915 there were widespread complaints, and by 1916 the 
Tsar’s war machine was sputtering and jerking as it bordered 
on collapse. In three years Russia had mobilized more than 
13,000,000 fighting men, but of these approximately 2,000,000 
were killed, approximately 4,000,000 were wounded, and 
2,500,000 were taken prisoners. For 24 months the news from 
the front was consistently bad. Russian armies were 
pushed out of Galicia, Russian Poland, part of Lithuania, 
Serbia and the Dardanelles. When the Ottoman Empire en- 
tered the war it cut Russian foreign trade to a trickle and 
thereby isolated Russia from the arms and munitions of her 
allies. Replacement troops sent to the front were often so 
ill-equipped that some of them had to pick up their rifles from 
dead soldiers along the way. Lack of ammunition often forced 
commanding officers to restrict the infantry to a daily ration 
of no more than four shells per gun. 

At this juncture the Tsar was warned by the British 
Ambassador that the whole Eastern Front might collapse 
if things did not improve. Desertions from the Russian Army 


The Naked Communist 


had reached scandalous proportions and the workers and 
peasants were threatening revolt. Food shortages were grow- 
ing because the government was buying grain with paper 
money which was practically worthless. In the cities the cost 
of living had tripled while wages had risen only slightly. 

But the Tsar could not see any reason for alarm. He had 
ridden out the revolt of 1905 ; he intended to do the same now. 
To demonstrate his complete confidence in the situation, he 
announced that he would go to the front to cheer the troops 
with his presence. 

What he seemed to forget was the fact that conditions 
among the people were almost identical with those which 
precipitated the revolution of 1905. It was far too late to 
cheer the troops with the Tsar’s presence Already the reign 
of the Tsar was doomed. Though he did not know it, Nicholas 
II was going to lose the throne in a matter of months, and 
shortly thereafter, his life. 



VI 

How Russia 

Became a Communist World Power 

The history of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the 
twenty years that followed might well be called the modern 
New Testament of Marxism. The Communists present it as 
their historic proof that the theories of Marx can be carried 
out successfully. Interestingly enough, however, some of the 
strongest proof against Communism is also revealed in this 
same epic of history. All of the pertinent facts have been 
brought together in this chapter so that the student might 
judge for himself. 

A review of the following questions may help to identify 
some of the problems which frequently arise when this period 
of history is discussed: 

Who forced the Tsar to abdicate? Where were the Com- 
munist leaders at the time? In what way was the Russian 
revolution of March, 1917, identical with the Russian revolu- 
tion of 1905? 

How did Lenin get back into Russia? Why did the Ger- 
man officers want to help him? 


The Naked Communist 


When the national elections were held on November 25, 
1917, what percentage of the people voted against Lenin’s 
regime? 

What was Lenin’s motive in taking Russia out of World 
War I? Why was the treaty he signed with the Germans 
called “a great catastrophe for Russia”? 

What happened when Lenin applied the theories of Marx 
to the Russian economy? Why did Lenin order the execution 
of the Tsar and his family? 

What were the circumstances which forced Lenin to 
abandon many of Marx’s favorite theories? 

Why did Lenin write from his deathbed that he hoped 
Joseph Stalin would never be allowed to seize power? 

What was the purpose of Stalin’s first Five-Year Plan? 

Why did the Communist Party in Russia try to depose 
Stalin in December 1932? What saved Stalin? 

Why did Stalin execute nearly all the leaders of the 
Communist Party? 

By 1938, what did Stalin say he was ready to do? 

The Russian Revolution of March, 1917 


It was March 8, 1917, when the swelling spirit of revolu- 
tion in Russia burst its banks and sent a flood of political 
indignation streaming after the Tsar and his regime. There 
was comparatively little violence. The feeling of revolt was 
so universal that as soon as the signal was given, a quarter of 
a million demonstrators appeared in the streets of the capital. 
When the masses of demonstrators had taken over the capital, 
the revolution automatically swept across the Empire. 

This revolution was of vast significance to the entire world. 
It will be recalled that the spring of 1917 was a highly critical 
stage of World War I. The United States was just getting 
into the fight, and France, Britain and Italy were almost 
exhausted. Because the Western Front was barely holding to- 
gether against the onslaught of Germany and her Central 
Powers, the collapse of the Eastern Front with its war machine 


Russia as a World Power 


of several million Russians could have meant unequivocal 
disaster for the Allies. 

The Russian revolution also held great significance for 
Germany. The Kaiser knew that if Russia withdrew from the 
war the large German forces in the East could be transferred 
to the West. This would have given him a vastly superior force 
capable of smashing all resistance. 

But the people behind the Russian revolution never in- 
tended to allow the Eastern Front to collapse. Their revolt 
against the Tsar was to save Russia, not destroy her. As soon 
as the Provisional Government had been set up, it announced 
an all-out program to create a democratic, constitutional form 
of government and to press for vigorous continuation of the 
war. This restored hope to the western Allies. The United 
States, England, France and Italy immediately recognized the 
new regime and the hearts of free people everywhere went 
out to the new star of freedom which seemed to be rising over 
the jubilant people of Russia. 

As for the Tsar, it was difficult for him to realize just 
what had happened. At the beginning of the revolution, 
Nicholas II categorically refused to admit that his govern- 
ment had disintegrated. When the demonstrations first began 
he dissolved the Duma (the people’s assembly) and ordered 
the troops to disperse the crowds. Within a week, however, 
his own ministers were urging him to abdicate since his cause 
was hopeless. Not until his generals also urged abdication 
did he finally capitulate. He and his family were then placed 
under house arrest at the imperial palace outside of Petr-o- 
grad. Although the people had suffered greatly under his 
rule, it was not the intention of the Provisional Government to 
kill the Tsar but to send him and his family to England as 
soon as war conditions would permit. 

With the Tsar taken care of, the Provisional Government 
then launched into the double task of initiating widespread 
domestic reforms and, at the same time, reassembling Russia’s 
military strength. At the front the troops began responding 
by exhibiting a new fighting spirit, and within a month re- 
markable progress was made in providing domestic reforms on 


The Naked Communist 


||2 the home front. For the first time in their history, the Rus- 
sian people had the prospect of a liberal democratic regime to 
govern them. Prince Lvov, who had joined the people’s revolt, 
confidently declared: “We should consider ourselves the hap- 
piest of men, for our generation finds itself in the happiest 
period of Russian History.” 


The Destruction of Russia's Plans for a Democracy 

The most significant thing about the abdication of the 
Tsar and the setting up of the people’s Provisional Government 
in Russia, is the simple historical fact that the Bolsheviks, or 
Communists, had practically nothing to do with it! This 
revolution had been initiated by the same kind of people as 
those who started the revolt against the Tsar in 1905. They 
represented Russia’s best people — the liberal aristocrats, the 
intellectuals, the businessmen, the millions of peasants and 
the millions of workers. But the Bolshevik leaders were no- 
where in sight. Lenin was in exile in Switzerland, Trotsky 
was in exile in New York and Joseph Stalin was in prison in 
Siberia. Unfortunately for their future propaganda, the 
Bolsheviks would never be able to take credit for the revolu- 
tion of March, 1917, which brought about the overthrow of 
the Tsar. 

It was the generosity of the Provisional Government 
which permitted the Bolshevik leaders to return. All political 
prisoners were released from Siberia and all political exiles 
abroad were invited to come home. When the British heard 
that Lenin was being allowed to return, they warned their 
Russian ally that this was a serious mistake. As a matter of 
fact, the only way Lenin was able to get back into Russia was 
through the assistance of German agents. The reason for 
this German cooperation is readily apparent. 

The Germans had become alarmed at the prospect of a 
comeback among the Russian people, and they were look- 
ing about for some opportunity to create a spirit of con- 


Russia as a World Power 


fusion and disunity within Russia’s Provisional Government. 
A brief conversation with Lenin in Switzerland convinced 
them that he was the man to accomplish it. They, therefore, 
transported Lenin and his wife and a number of Russian 
exiles across Germany into Sweden. It was simple for Lenin 
to proceed immediately to the Russian capital. 

When Lenin arrived in Petrograd (the new name for St. 
Petersburg, later changed to Leningrad), he was welcomed 
by the crowds of people as a sympathetic colleague of the 
revolution. A military escort helped him to the roof of an 
armored car where the vast throng waited expectantly for 
his commendation of their success. But when Lenin’s lip- 
clipped words began to stream forth, they were far from 
commendatory. His inflammatory declamation literally 
amounted to a new declaration of war! 

He bitterly denounced the efforts of the Provisional Gov- 
ernment to set up a republic. He demanded a Communist 
dictatorship of the proletariat and called for a struggle to 
take over the landed estates and immediately subject the 
Russian people to the economic discipline of full socialism. 
He denounced all further efforts to continue the war and 
said an immediate peace with Germany should be negotiated. 
(He was later accused of trying to take Russia out of the war 
to repay his obligation to the Germans.) 

It was only a matter of weeks until all Russia began hear- 
ing the propaganda of the Bolshevik leaders as they echoed the 
program which Lenin had laid down in his Petrograd speech. 
Stalin, who was back from Siberia, wrote articles in the new 
Communist paper urging counterrevolution. Trotsky, who 
had returned from New York, used his brilliant oratory to 
incite the labor unions and the military forces to overthrow 
the Provisional Government. “Peace, Land and Bread,” was 
the Bolshevik slogan. Under the circumstances, this propa- 
ganda was bound to have some appeal. 

The Provisional Government tried to warn the people 
against the tempting promises of the Bolsheviks, but the gov- 
ernment was beginning to lose prestige because the masses 
had been demanding reforms faster than the new regime 


The Maked Communist 


could provide them. This tended to discredit the warning 
voices of government leaders. In fact, during July, 1917, the 
outbreaks among the peasants, workers and troops were 
again beginning to crop out and Lenin concluded that the time 
to strike was ripe. He assumed that since the Russian 
Army was desperately involved in trying to hold back the 
German forces at the front it would not be difficult to over- 
come the home guard of old men and young boys. How- 
ever, in this he miscalculated. When Lenin struck out with 
his Bolshevik forces, the Provisional Government not only 
suppressed the uprising, but forced Lenin to flee to Finland to 
save his life. 

From then on Lenin proceeded more cautiously. He al- 
lowed his subordinates to organize fresh revolutionary forces 
while he directed the work from abroad. One of these subordi- 
nates was Trotsky who had now openly identified himself with 
the Bolsheviks and was rapidly rising to the number two posi- 
tion. He was assigned the task of organizing the “Red 
Guard” of armed insurrectionists among the labor unions, the 
Army, the Navy and the peasants. 

By early October, Lenin felt it was safe to return to Russia 
and on November 7, he made the fateful decision to commence 
an all-out revolution against the Provisional Government. The 
revolution began when Lenin ordered Trotsky to have the Red 
Guard open fire on the Winter Palace and try to seize all 
other strongholds of the government. Under fierce attack, these 
centers soon surrendered, and nearly all the officials of the 
Provisional Government were captured. This was the begin- 
ning of what Communist writers call “the ten days that shook 
the world.” 

Before many weeks the use of force and violence per- 
mitted the Bolsheviks to seize power in nearly all important 
cities. The regular army could not come to the assistance of 
the Provisional Government and consequently the people found 
themselves attacked by the Bolshevik anarchists at a time 
when they had practically no forces whatever with which to 
resist. By the middle of December the Bolsheviks were put- 


Russia as a World Power 


ting down the last remnants of stubborn resistance, although 
long before this the masses of the people knew that their 
dreams for a democracy were dead. 

Russia Repudiates Communism at the Polls 

Before the Provisional Government had been overthrown 
it had set November 25 as the date for a national election 
in order to create a people’s assembly or congress. The 
Bolsheviks themselves had made the most noise in demanding 
this election and therefore Lenin did not dare postpone it 
even though it came while he was still consolidating his power. 
The election was held as scheduled. 

The results were catastrophic insofar as Lenin’s dream of 
popular backing was concerned. Over 75 per cent of the popula- 
tion voted against him. Obviously this meant that the people’s 
elected representatives would be opposed to the Bolshevik 
regime; therefore when these representatives convened on 
January 18, 1918, Lenin had already decided what to do. 

He demanded that the people’s congress turn over all 
their legislative functions to the Bolshevik-controlled “Con- 
gress of the Soviets” and then vote to dissolve themselves. 
This, of course, was so illegal and ridiculous, that they would 
not hear of it. Lenin therefore invoked his “means of last re- 
sort” — force. Early the next morning, armed guards entered 
the meeting hall and ordered the delegates to adjourn. As the 
delegates looked at the bristling rifles, they knew there was no 
alternative. Reluctantly, they left. This illegal act sounded 
the death knell for democracy in Russia. Nevertheless, Lenin 
knew this act of ruthless expediency had given his enemies 
potent propaganda to discredit him. It was resolved that all 
future coups by Red forces would provide the illusion of being 
achieved through normal democratic processes. For the mo- 
ment, however, the damage was done. The Communists had 
overthrown the nearest thing to representative government the 


115 


The Naked Communist 


Russians had ever known. Now the people would learn some- 
thing about the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. 


Lenin Takes Russia Out of the War 


It was one of Lenin’s first ambitions to wipe out the East- 
ern Front and take Russia out of the war. In addition to ful- 
filling any promises he might have made to the Germans, Lenin 
had a highly important reason of his own for this action. 
He believed that the strain of the war would make it pos- 
sible to set off a series of Communist revolutions in every 
major capitalist nation. Therefore, he wanted to disentangle 
Russia from the conflict in order to get her prepared for her 
role as the “Motherland of Communism.” This would give 
him a chance to consolidate his power in Russia and then to 
supervise the revolutions in the war-weary capitalist nations 
so as to bring the whole world under the dictatorship of the 
proletariat within a very short time. 

However, getting Russia out of the war did not prove 
to be an easy task. For months the Russian armies had been 
retreating in the face of superior military forces. Conse- 
quently, when Lenin finally obtained an armistice with the 
Central Powers and offered to negotiate a peaceful settlement, 
they treated him as the defeated leader of a conquered nation. 
The demands which Germany made upon Russia were 
outrageous. Lenin hesitated. To further persuade him, the 
Germans marched even deeper into Russian territory, and 
were soon threatening the very precincts of Petrograd. Lenin 
hurriedly moved his government to Moscow and then did 
something which was deeply humiliating to a Communist 

revolutionary; he appealed to Russia’s old capitalist allies 

France, England and the United States— for help. 

He was further humiliated when these countries complete- 
ly ignored him. Lenin had destroyed the balance of the 
Allied defense when he pulled the Russian armies out of the 
conflict. Now these nations were so busy preparing to defend 


Russia as a World Power 


themselves against the all-out German offensive being planned 
for the spring that they had neither the desire nor the means 
to help Lenin out of his self-inflicted predicament. 

Like the shrewd political gambler that he was, Lenin now 
weighed his chances for survival in the balance and decided 
to force his own party to support him in accepting the in- 
decent demands of the Central Powers. Even the iron-disci- 
plined members of the ruling committee of the Bolshevik 
Party balked at Lenin’s proposal, but, nevertheless, he finally 
forced it through with a vote of seven to four. 

As a result, a settlement was signed between Russia and 
the Central Powers on March 3, 1918, which has become 
known as the notorious treaty of Brest-Litovsk. 

In it, Lenin accepted terms which took from the Russian 
Empire 62,000,000 people, 1,267,000 square miles of her arable 
lands, 26 per cent of her railroads, 33 per cent of her factories, 
75 per cent of her coal mines and 75 per cent of her iron mines. 
In addition to this, Lenin promised that Russia would pay the 
Central Powers li/j billion dollars in indemnities! 

Such was to be the end of a war that had cost the Russian 
people 8i/ 2 million casualties. 

The First Attempt to Communize Russia 

With Russia out of the war, Lenin now felt sufficient 
confidence to subordinate the whole Russian economy to the 
theories of Communism. He confiscated all industry from 
private owners and set it up under government operation. He 
seized all land which belonged to the aristocracy, the Tsar 
and the church. He also seized all the livestock and imple- 
ments which ordinarily served this land. He then abolished 
wages and replaced them with direct payment “in kind.” This 
saddled Russia with a sluggish and primitive barter system. 
He ordered all domestic goods to be rationed among the people 
according to their class. For example, a worker or soldier was 
allocated thirty-five pounds of bread, while a nonworker, such 
as a manager, received only twelve. Lenin also made all labor 


The Naked Communist 


subject to mobilization. People with technical skills could be 
compelled to accept any work assigned to them. The selling 
of retail goods was taken over by the government. 

As for the peasants, Lenin distributed the confiscated 
land to them, but required them to work the land without hir- 
ing any help and without selling any of the produce. It was 
all to go to the government. Furthermore, the land could not 
be sold, leased nor mortgaged. 

In March, 1918, the Bolsheviks changed their name to the 
“Russian Communist Party.” 

But from the very beginning the Russian people did not 
take well to the new order. Without any personal incentive 
among the workers, production on the farm and in the factory 
dwindled to a trickle. The factories were soon down to 13 per 
cent of what they had been producing before the war started, 
and the farmers cut their production in half. Black markets be- 
gan to flourish. Workers often stole goods from the factories to 
exchange for food which the peasants secretly withheld from 
the government. Before long, the peasants were holding back 
more than one-third of their crops. 

As might have been expected, this decomposition of the 
Russian economy brought down upon the heads of the people 
all the wrath and frustration of the Bolshevik leaders. Every 
terror method known was used to force the people to produce. 
This led to retaliation. 

During the summer of 1918, violent civil war broke out 
as the “White Guard” vowed they would overthrow the Reds 
and free the Russian people. The western Allied Nations, 
though hard-pressed themselves, were sympathetic to this 
movement and sent supplies, equipment and even what troops 
they could spare to help release the Russian people from the 
Bolshevik grip. 

Lenin knew this was a crisis of the highest order. He 
therefore decided to strike back in three different directions 
simultaneously. To resist organized military groups, he au- 
thorized Trotsky to forcibly mobilize a Red Army which 
ultimately totaled five million. To resist the people’s anti- 
Bolshevik sentiment and refusal to work, he organized the 


Russia as a World Power 


secret police or Cheka. This body could investigate, arrest, 
adjudicate and execute suspected persons. Authorities state 
that during the civil war, literally tens of thousands went 
down before its firing squads. Finally, Lenin struck out at 
the Tsar. To prevent any possibility of a new monarchial 
party being developed, he had the Tsar, the Empress, their 
children and all their retainers shot to death at Yekaterin- 
burg and their bodies completely destroyed. This mass assassi- 
nation occurred July 16, 1918. 

Six weeks later the scalding vengeance of the White Rus- 
sians nearly cost Lenin his life. The Bolshevik aristocracy 
was caught under vulnerable circumstances and a volley of 
rifle fire assassinated the Cheka chief and seriously wounded 
Lenin. To avenge itself, the Cheka summarily executed 500 
persons. 

When the end of World War I came on November 11, 
1918, it had little effect on the situation in Russia. The civil 
war continued with even greater violence, and the Bolsheviks 
redoubled their efforts to communize Russia. Lenin continued 
to set up Soviets or workers’ councils, in every part of the 
empire, and these Soviets in turn sent delegates to the supreme 
Soviet at the capital. Through the channels of this Bolshevik- 
dominated labor-union empire, Lenin carried out his policies. 
Behind the Soviets stood the enforcing power of the Red Army, 
and the terror of the Cheka secret police. 

In spite of all these coercive methods, however, Lenin 
eventually discovered he was fighting a losing battle. For a 
while he took courage from the fact that United States, 
England, France and Japan began withdrawing their troops 
and supplies under the League of Nations policy of “self- 
determination for all peoples,” but the ferocious fighting of 
the White Russians continued. 

The breaking point for Lenin came in 1921-22 when the 
economic inefficiency of the Bolshevik regime was compounded 
by a disastrous famine. There was a complete crop failure 
along the Volga — the bread basket of Russia. Nikolaus Bas- 
seches wrote: “No one who was ever in that famine area, no 
one who saw those starving and brutalized people, will ever 


The Naked Communist 


forget the spectacle. Cannibalism was common. The despair- 
ing people crept about, emaciated, like brown mummies. . . . 
When those hordes fell upon an unprepared village, they were 
apt to massacre every living person.” 

Packs of wild, orphaned children roamed like hungry 
wolves through cities and country sides. It is estimated that 
during the year 1922, over 33 million Russians were starving, 
and 5 million died. The people of the United States were so 
shocked by this almost inconceivable amount of human suffer- 
ing that they raised funds for the Hoover Commission to feed 
over 10 million Russians during 1922. 


The End of a Communist Dream 


Even before this disaster, however, Lenin had forced 
himself to admit that he had assigned his country an impos- 
sible task. His Bolshevik revolution had not brought peace 
to Russia, but a terrible civil war in which 28 million Rus- 
sians had lost their lives. The principles of socialism which 
Lenin had forced upon the people had not brought increased 
production as Marx had promised, but had reduced production 
to a point where even in normal times it would not adequately 
clothe nor feed half the people. 

It was under these circumstances and in the light of these 
facts that Lenin acknowledged defeat and ordered a retreat. 
As early as 1921 he announced that there would be a “New 
Economic Program” — afterwards referred to as the NEP. 

This humiliating reversal of policy was adopted by the 
Communists to keep from being dethroned. Lenin brought 
back the payment of wages to workers, which immediately 
generated the circulation of money in place of the old barter 
system. In place of the government trading centers, he al- 
lowed private concerns to begin buying and selling so that in 
less than a year three-fourths of all retail distribution was 
back in private hands. He violated the sanctity of Marx’s 
memory by even encouraging the peasants to lease additional 
land and hire other peasants to work for them. He also tried 


Russia as a World Power 


to encourage private initiative by promising the peasants they 
could sell most of their grain on the open market instead of 
having it seized by agents of the government as in the past. 

In merely a matter of months, the pauperism and starva- 
tion of the old Communist economy began to disappear. The 
law of supply and demand began to have its effect so that 
private initiative commenced to provide what the people needed. 
In the cities an air of relative prosperity rapidly returned to 
the bleak streets and empty shops. 

The Rise of Stalin to Power 

Lenin barely lived long enough to see the New Economic 
Program go into effect. He had his first stroke in 1922, and 
died January 20, 1924. As Lenin saw the end drawing near, 
he became alarmed over the possibility of Joseph Stalin becom- 
ing his successor. For many years Lenin had been using 
Stalin to perform tasks requiring the most ruthless methods, 
but now he became fearful of what might happen if Stalin 
used these same methods to take over the Communist Party. 

On December 25, 1923, while lying speechless and half- 
paralyzed on his deathbed, Lenin wrote the following dra- 
matic appeal to the members of the Politiburo (the supreme 
governing council of the Communist Party, and hence, of all 
Russia) : 

“Stalin is too rude, and this fault, entirely supportable 
in relations among us Communists, becomes insupportable in 
the office of the General Secretary. Therefore, I propose to 
the comrades to find a way to remove Stalin from that position 
and appoint to it another man who in all respects differs from 
Stalin . . . namely, more patient, more loyal, more polite, and 
more attentive to comrades, less capricious, etc. This cir- 
cumstance may seem an insignificant trifle, but I think that 
from the point of view of preventing a split, and from the 
point of view of the relation between Stalin and Trotsky . . . 
it is not a trifle, or it is such a trifle as may acquire decisive 
significance.” 


The Naked Communist 


Time proved that Lenin knew whereof he spoke. Stalin’s 
whole attitude toward life may be caught in a statement which 
he later made as he was rising to power: “To choose one’s 
victim, to prepare one’s plans minutely, to stake an implacable 
vengeance, and then go to bed . . . there is nothing sweeter 
in the world.” 

By 1927 Stalin had achieved precisely what Lenin feared 
he might — the outright control of the Russian Empire. He 
had not only unseated Trotsky, but had driven from the 
arena every formidable source of opposition. He had attained 
such complete victory in the battle for the control of world 
Communism that he now felt strong enough to try and satisfy 
one of his greatest ambitions. He determined to make a 
second attempt to communize Russia. 


The First Five-Year Plan 

The first Five-Year Plan began in 1928. It was aimed at 
wiping out the prosperous independence of businessmen and 
the peasant farmers who had been thriving during the New 
Economic Program. Once again there was widespread con- 
fiscation of property, and once again the secret police began 
executing masses of Russians who resisted. Stalin was de- 
termined that the Russian economy should be immediately 
forced into the confines of theoretical socialism and demon- 
strate to the world that it could out-produce and out-distribute 
the capitalistic industrial nations, such as the United States 
and Great Britain. Within weeks, however, the Five-Year- 
Plan had wiped out the warm glow of prosperity and compara- 
tive abundance which Russia had known under the NEP. 
Rationing was necessary and the hated revolutionary “starva- 
tion bread” made of birch bark had to be reintroduced. 

The basic theme of the Five- Year-Plan was collectivized 
industry and collectivized agriculture. Stalin knew he would 
get resistance from the prosperous peasants (called Kulaks) 
and he therefore ordered a complete genocidal liquidation of 
the Kulaks as a class. Some of the Kulaks destroyed all their 


Russia as a World Power 


property, burned their homes, slaughtered their cattle and 
fled toward the Caucasus mountains, but most of them were 
caught or died on the way. Official reports tell how rebellious 
villages were leveled to the ground by artillery fire and in one 
area of the Don region, 50,000 men, women and children were 
destroyed, leaving a vestige of only 2,000 people who were 
shipped off to central Asia, while the land which they had 
cultivated for generations was taken over for collectivized 
farming. 

Stalin also included in the Five-Year-Plan an accelera- 
tion of the Communist fight against religion. By 1930 the 
Union of Militant Atheists had an active membership of two- 
and-one-half million. Churches and cathedrals were turned into 
secular buildings. The Christmas festival was prohibited and 
the buying and selling of Christmas trees was a criminal 
offense. Sunday was eliminated as a day of worship, and 
workers were required to rotate their days off so that industry 
would continue day and night, seven days a week. 

Stalin also attempted to follow Engel’s suggestion to break 
up the family. All the theories of Marx and Engels were 
coming to life under the dictatorship of Joseph Stalin. 

By 1930 Stalin was beginning to realize that he may have 
pressed the long-suffering endurance of the people too far. He 
therefore came forth with an expression of deep anguish for 
the suffering masses. He blamed all the troubles on the govern- 
ment officers who, in their zeal, were overshooting the mark 
and imposing unreasonable demands upon the people, par- 
ticularly the peasants. He wrote as though he had just heard 
of the terrible misery which had overtaken the people. But, 
having cleared himself for the record, Stalin then went firmly 
ahead with terror tactics which made conditions more fright- 
ful than ever. 

The Communist Crisis of 1932-33 

By 1932 the situation had reached a crisis. The Russian 
people had suffered starvation, mass executions, ruthless liqui- 


The Naked Communist 


124 dation of the Kulak class, suppression of all private enterprise, 
deportations to Siberia and long sentences to forced labor 
camps. The crimes against humanity were on a scale com- 
parable to the Nazi atrocities subsequently committed at 
Dachau, Buchenwald, and Belsen. 

In a recent biography of Stalin, Nikolaus Basseches states 
that during 1932 the leaders of the Communist Party knew 
they would have to dethrone Stalin or face revolution. Even 
the army was about to revolt. The Politburo held a secret 
meeting in December and Stalin made a number of proposals 
to further suppress the people, but this time even these men 
who owed their political existence to Stalin voted him down 
flatly. It is reported that Stalin was so amazed by this dis- 
play of opposition that he admitted to Molotov that perhaps 
he should accept defeat and resign. Molotov, however, is said 
to have encouraged him to hold on a little longer to see if con- 
ditions might not improve. 


U.S. Recognition of Communist Russia 
Comes at a Critical Time 

Molotov was right. Future circumstances did offer Stalin 
a solution to his crisis. The first thing that happened was 
Hitler’s rise to power in January, 1933. Hitler’s strong anti- 
communist policies led many Russians to believe that there 
might be a war between Russia and Germany, and they there- 
fore began to forget their resentment against Stalin because 
of their worry over Hitler. The second factor which helped 
Stalin was the recognition of his Communist regime by the 
great leader of world capitalism— the United States. This 
last factor was a singular development. 

For sixteen years the United States had refused to recog- 
nize Russia, and the U.S. Secretaries of State during that 
period were very precise in explaining why. For example, 
in 1923 Secretary Charles E. Hughes declared: “There can 
be no question of the sincere friendliness of the American 


Russia as a World Power 


people toward the Russian people. And there is for this very 
reason a strong desire that nothing should be done (such as 
granting recognition) to place the seal of approval on the 
tyrannical measures that have been adopted in Russia, or to 
take any action which might retard the gradual reassertion 
of the Russian people of their right to live in freedom.” 

Many such statements over a period of years placed 
Stalin on notice that if the United States were to recognize 
Russia, it would require many changes in Communist policies 
and Communist tactics. Therefore, early in 1933, when Stalin 
sent his old comrade in arms, Maxim Litvinov, to Wash- 
ington to negotiate for U.S. recognition, he knew what the 
terms would have to be. In written statements, Litvinov 
promised that henceforth the U.S.S.R. would not attempt to 
interfere in the internal affairs of the United States ; he said 
the U.S.S.R. would not allow its officials to use propaganda or 
agitate for the overthrow of the United States Government, 
and furthermore, he promised that the U.S.S.R. would not per- 
mit any group to organize in Russia for the purpose of agitat- 
ing for the overthrow of the United States Government. At 
the moment it looked as though the Communists were going 
to repudiate the Communist International and world revolu- 
tion. On the basis of these solemn promises by an official of 
the Russian government, recognition was extended by the 
United States to the U.S.S.R. late in 1933. Such were the cir- 
cumstances which led the U.S. to change its policy toward 
Communist Russia from one of co-REsistance to co-EXistence. 

But within ten months, officials of the United States knew 
this nation had been defrauded. William C. Bullitt, the first 
U.S. ambassador, reported from Moscow that world revolu- 
tion was on the tongue of every Soviet official. Plans were 
already under way for the Communist International (an or- 
ganization to promote world revolution) to hold its seventh 
conference in Russia, even though this violated both the letter 
and the spirit of the promises made by Litvinov. The U.S. 
vigorously protested to Litvinov, but he merely shrugged his 
shoulders and said the U.S.S.R. had absolutely no “obligations 
of any kind with regard to the Communist International.” It 


The Naked Communist 


was obvious that conditions in Russia had changed. Stalin 
once more felt secure in his dictatorship. The prestige of 
U.S. recogniton had served its purpose, and the promises of 
the U.S.S.R. were now scraps of paper. 

When the Seventh World Congress of the Communist 
International convened, the United States was denounced along 
with all other capitalistic countries, and plans were openly 
advocated for the violent overthrow of the U.S. Government. 
In fact, as we shall see in the next chapter, at the very time 
Litvinov was promising not to interfere in the domestic affairs 
of the United States, Soviet intelligence officers were busy in 
Washington setting up elaborate spy rings in various agencies 
of the government. 

There were political authorities who believe the United 
States should have broken off diplomatic relations with the 
Soviets the very moment it was discovered that the Com- 
munist leaders were brazenly violating their promises. But 
this did not happen. Diplomatic strategists at the time advo- 
cated that we treat the Bolsheviks like big blustering boys and 
overlook their delinquencies. They further rationalized that 
at least we would have a listening post in Russia by maintain- 
ing an ambassador there. It was on the basis of this recom- 
mendation that the U.S. policy of coexistence fell another 
notch. Our diplomats decided to eat humble pie made out of 
apathetic tolerance for broken promises and abject submissive- 
ness to Communist abuse. This boosted Stalin’s political stock 
in Russia tremendously. 


Joseph Stalin’s Return to Power 


When Stalin saw the outward signs of public resentment 
in Russia disappearing, he felt he could once more assume a 
bolder front. But a deep-seated hatred continued to fester in 
the minds of the Communist Party leaders. They secretly 
admitted among themselves that Stalin must be removed “for 
the good of the Party.” Therefore, the top revolutionaries of 


Russia as a World Power 


Russia surreptitiously combined their ideas on how best to 
do away with Stalin. Finally, they decided the best plan was 
to first destroy those immediately around him and then effect 
a coup. The initial attempt was against Sergei Kirov — a 
favorite of the Man of Steel who had been officially designated 
by the Politburo as Stalin’s successor. 

Kirov was shot and killed gangster style December 1, 1934. 
It is said that nothing had ever so deeply affected Stalin as 
this murder. It was perfectly clear to him what his enemies 
were up to and he therefore struck back with a viciously 
effective blow. Lists were published of more than one thou- 
sand persons selected from every district in Russia and all 
these were summarily shot. 

Stalin then directed the secret police to plunge into every 
devious crevice of the party and dig and prod until they had 
found out who was behind the murder of Kirov. This was 
not difficult. Even many of the most insignificant members of 
the Party were aware that some of the biggest names in Russia 
were involved in the conspiracy. To save their own skins 
they quickly confessed. Stalin ordered the arrest of every 
suspect together with their families, associates, friends and 
even their correspondents. 

Tens of thousands went down before firing squads in 
secret executions while the more prominent officials were 
exhibited before the world at Stalin’s famous purge trials. In 
these trials Stalin’s former comrades of the revolution sought 
to win mercy for their families by confessing in the most self- 
degrading language to all the crimes of which they were ac- 
cused. But it gained them nothing. The list of those publicly 
condemned with their families and friends is described by 
Nikolaus Basseches as involving “not only ex-leaders of the 
party . . . but also fully a dozen members of the Government 
who were still in office, and the supreme commander of the 
army, the Chief of Staff, almost all the army commanders, 
and in addition a considerable number of senior officers; the 
Minister of Police and the highest police officials ; the Deputy 
People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs, almost all the am- 


The Naked Communist 


bassadors and ministers representing the Soviet Union abroad, 
almost the whole of the diplomatic staff at the Ministry in 
Moscow; and also highly placed judges and members of the 
governments of the federal republics.” 

Even Whittaker Chambers who was an American Com- 
munist spy at the time suspected that a horrible crime against 
humanity was being enacted in Russia. He later wrote : “The 
great purge was in the most literal sense a massacre. . . . This 
great massacre, probably the greatest in history was deliber- 
ately planned and executed. . . . Those killed have been esti- 
mated from several hundred thousand to several million men 
and women. The process took about three years, 1935-1938.” 


Stalin Creates a New Class 

At the very end of the process came the execution of the 
executioners. Since time immemorial it has been a favorite trick 
of political pirates and brigands to use a hand-picked band of 
followers to commit murder and then murder the murderers 
to cover up the original crime. Stalin followed the same 
procedure. He selected a pathological personality named 
Yeshov to set up the secret police machinery for the purge 
and then drew certain judges into the conspiracy. Both police 
and judges faithfully performed their miserable missions on 
the assumption that they were basking in the radiant light 
of Stalin’s affection and trust. 

Only when they found themselves being flung into dirty 
dungeons or facing firing squads did they realize that Stalin’s 
supposed affection and trust was nothing but the figment of 
their own imaginations. By the hundreds, the chiefs of secret 
police units, the heads of forced labor camps and the examining 
judges who had conducted the purge in every district of the 
U.S.S.R. found themselves sharing the fate of their victims. 

Even Yeshov, whose unbalanced mind had not only 
heaped cruelty and violence on Stalin’s enemies but upon their 
wives and children as well, now faced extinction. He was 


Russia as a World Power 


swept up in the great final dragnet of terror and disappeared 
into oblivion along with those who had served under him. 

Once Stalin had skirted the brink of political disaster he 
immediately determined to consolidate his power by the in- 
novation of a Communist spoils system. Prior to this time, 
the Communist leaders had recognized only two classes — the 
workers and the peasants. Stalin now decided to give recog- 
nition to a new class — the Communist bureaucracy or official 
class. He bestowed special favors on them by allowing them 
to shop in “closed” distribution centers. These centers had 
great quantities of items which were never distributed to the 
workers. And Stalin arranged it so that his party appointees 
received other favors — dwellings, luxuries, special holidays, 
special educational opportunities for their children. This was 
Stalin’s way of building a new Communist Party with members 
who owed absolute allegiance to him. 

He likewise protected them in the new constitution which 
he presented to the Congress of Soviets in 1936. It provided 
for the protection of “occupational property.” Thus the offi- 
cial class could not be deprived of wages, articles of consump- 
tion, houses nor savings. It even provided that this “occupa- 
tional property” could be bequeathed. Substantial estates 
could, therefore, be accumulated by the official class and passed 
on to a selected beneficiary. These gifts of inheritance (which 
Communist propaganda had denounced with vehemence for 
over a century) could also be given to non-relations and in any 
amount without restrictions. 

To further illustrate the whole change in Stalin’s atti- 
tude, he adopted a series of “reforms” which were purely 
capitalistic in nature. These included payment of interest 
on savings, the issuing of bonds to which premiums were 
attached and the legalizing of a wider disparity in wages. 
A laborer, for example, might receive only one hundred rubles 
a month while a member of the official class could now get 
as high as six thousand rubles per month! 

All of this clearly illustrated one simple fact concerning 
developments in Russia. The “have nots” of yesterday had 


The Naked Communist 


130 taken possession of the realm. Their policy was likewise 
simple: to stay in power permanently and enjoy the spoils of 
their conquest. 

By 1938 Stalin was supremely confident of his position. 
He announced that the regime had no enemies left inside of 
Russia, and there was no longer a need for terrorism or sup- 
pression. He made it clear, however, that there must be un- 
deviating prosecution of the Communist program abroad and 
that the acts of terrorism against the outer world of capital- 
ism should be accepted as necessary and unavoidable. 

Russia was now asserting herself as a world power. 
Stalin was clearly manifesting a determinaton to enter the 
next phase of his dictatorship — the expansion of world Com- 
munism 



VII 

Communism in the United States 


We have now traced the history of Russian Communism 
up to 1938. In order to appreciate what happened after 1938 
it is necessary to understand the historical development of 
Communism in the United States. 

The conquest of the United States by Marxist forces has 
been an important part of the plan of Communist leaders for 
many years : ‘First we will take Eastern Europe ; then 
the masses of Asia. Then we will encircle the United States 
of America which will be the last bastion of Capitalism. 
We will not have to attack it; it will fall like an over- 
ripe fruit into our hands.” This clearly reflects the Marxist 
intent to overthrow the United States by internal subversion. 

It is sometimes difficult for us to realize how enthusias- 
tically encouraged the Communist leaders have frequently felt 
toward the progress of their program in the United States. 
The answers to the following questions will indicate why : 

Have Americans who embraced Communism overlooked 
a vigorous warning from the Pilgrim Fathers? Why are the 
Pilgrim Fathers described as having practiced Communism 


The Naked Communist 


132 




under “the most favorable circumstances”? What were the 
results? 

How soon after the Russian Revolution was Communism 
launched in the United States? How extensive was the first 
wave of Communist violence ? 

What was William Z. Foster’s testimony under oath con- 
cerning a Communist revolution in the United States? 

Why was Whittaker Chambers able to furnish so many 
details concerning Communism in the United States? In June, 
1932, Chambers was asked to pay the full price of being a 
Communist — what was it? How did Chambers’ small daugh- 
ter influence him to abandon Communism? 

What was the background of Elizabeth Bentley? How 
did she happen to become the Communist “wife” of a man 
she did not even know ? 

How did Communists who were employed as Russian 
spies successfully clear themselves? 

How would you expect the Communist leaders in Russia 
to react as they reviewed the U.S. list of top-level government 
employees who were risking imprisonment and disgrace to 
commit espionage and otherwise carry out the orders of the 
Soviet leaders ? 


American Founding Fathers Try Communism 

One of the forgotten lessons of U.S. history is the fact 
that the American founding fathers tried Communism before 
they tried capitalistic free enterprise. 

In 1620 when the Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plymouth, 
they had already determined to establish a Communist colony. 
In many ways this communal society was set up under the 
most favorable circumstances. First of all, they were isolated 
from outside help and were desperately motivated to make 
the plan work in order to survive. Secondly, they had a select 
group of religious men and women who enjoyed a coopera- 
tive, fraternal feeling toward one another. The Pilgrims 




Communism in the United States 


launched their Communist community with the most hopeful 
expectations. Governor William Bradford has left us a 
remarkable account of what happened. The Governor reports : 

“This community . . . was found to breed much confusion 
and discontent and retard much employment that would have 
been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men that 
were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that 
they should spend their time and strength to work for other 
men’s wives and children without any recompense. The strong 
. . . had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he 
that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; 
this was thought an injustice . . . and for men’s wives to be 
commanded 1 to do service for other men, as dressing their 
meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of 
slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it.” 

But the colonists would have continued to endure Com- 
munism if it had only been productive. The thing which worried 
Governor Bradford was the fact that the total amount of 
production under this communal arrangement was so low 
that the colonists were faced with starvation. Therefore, he 
says: 

“At length, after much debate . . . the governor, gave 
way that they should set corn every man for his own purpose, 
and in that regard trust to themselves . . . and so assigned to 
every family a parcel of land according to the proportion of 
their number.” 

Once a family was given land and corn they had to plant, 
cultivate and harvest it or suffer the consequences. The Gov- 
ernor wanted the people to continue living together as a so- 
ciety of friends but communal production was to be replaced 
by private, free enterprise production. After one year the 
Governor was able to say : 

“This had very good success ; for it made all hands very 
industrious, so that much more corn was planted than other- 
wise would have been. . . . The women now went willing into 
the fields, and took their little ones with them to set corn, 


'Note that even in a Christian brotherhood, Communism 
practiced without setting up a dictatorship. 


cannot be 


The Naked Communist 


which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to 
have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and 
oppression.” 

The Pilgrim fathers had discovered the great human se- 
cret that a man will compel himself to go ever so much farther 
than he will permit anyone else to compel him to go. As Gov- 
ernor Bradford thought about their efforts to live in a Com- 
munist society, he wrote down this conclusion: 

“The experience that was had in this common cause and 
condition, tried sundrie years, and that amongst godly and 
sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato 
and other ancients — applauded by some in later times — that 
the taking away of property, and bringing it into a common- 
wealth, would make them happy and flourishing; as if they 
were wiser than God .” 2 

It becomes apparent that Governor Bradford concluded 
that Communism is not only inefficient but that it is un- 
natural and in violation of the laws of God. This may raise 
a question in the minds of some students who have heard that 
Communism provides the most ideal means of practicing the 
basic principles of Christianity. Elsewhere, we have con- 
sidered the historical background of this problem . 3 

It is interesting that after the Pilgrim Fathers tried Com- 
munism they abandoned it in favor of a free enterprise type 
of capitalism which, over the centuries, has become more 
highly developed in the United States than in any other na- 
tion. In its earliest stages this system was described as a 
heartless, selfish institution, but economists have pointed out 
that after a slow and painful evolution it has finally de- 
veloped into a social-economic tool which has thus far produced 
more wealth and distributed it more uniformly among the 
people of this land than any system modern men have tried . 4 
The evolutionary process of further improving and further 


-Bradford, William, “history of Plymouth,” pp. 160-102. 

3 For a discussion of this Question, see the essay, “did the early 
CHRISTIANS PRACTICE COMMUNISM?” page 343. 

4 For a discussion of this subject, see the essay, “what is free-enter- 
prise capitalism?” page 327. 


Communism in (he United States 


adapting capitalism to the needs of a highly industrialized 
society is still going on. 


Marxism Comes to the United States 


When the Bolshevik Revolution took place in Russia in 
1917, it held a particular interest for a certain group of 
Americans. This was the left wing faction of the Socialist 
Party. For years, the Socialists had been trying to get the 
Federal Government to take over all major industries and 
socialize the country, but this attempt at peaceful legislative 
reform had failed. Then suddenly, in November, 1917, these 
people heard that the Russian Bolsheviks had used revolu- 
tionary violence to seize power and had thereafter socialized 
their country overnight. This was promptly accepted by the 
left wing Socialists as the formula for America. They imme- 
diately determined to form a Communist party and use vio- 
lent revolutionary activity to sovietize America at the earliest 
possible date. They were greatly encouraged in this venture 
by a man named John Reed, a journalist, who had recently 
returned from Russia with glowing enthusiasm for the revolu- 
tion and world Communism. 

This group made contact with Moscow and was invited 
to send delegates to Russia in March, 1919, to help form the 
Third International (copied after Marx’s First International 
to promote world revolution). When they returned home they 
started their campaign. John Reed used the columns of the 
“New York Communist” to agitate the workers to revolt. The 
Communist ranks were swelled by members of the old I.W.W. 
(International Workers of the World) who gravitated to the 
new movement with suggestions that the party members learn 
to use the techniques of sabotage and violence which the 
I.W.W. had employed during World War I. 

Further encouragement came to the movement when the 
Russian Communist Party sent over an official representative 
of the Soviet Government to help organize a full-fledged 
Bolshevik program. His name was C. A. Martens. He brought 


The Naked Communist 


136 


along substantial quantities of money to spend in building 
cells inside the American labor unions and the U.S. armed 
forces. It was not enough that the Communists should save 
the proletariat of Russia; Comrade Martens assured all who 
heard him that his mission from Moscow was to free the down- 
trodden workers of capitalistic America. As the movement pro- 
gressed, American representatives were sent to Russia to get 
permission to set up the “Communist Labor Party of the 
United States” as a branch of the Russian-sponsored Com- 
munist International (organization for world revolution). 
Later the word “Labor” was dropped. 

The officers of the new Communist Party signed the 
“Twenty-one Conditions of Admission” which were to em- 
barrass them many years later when the Party was ordered 
to register in 1952 as an agency under the control of the 
Soviet Union. 

Here are typical commitments from the “Twenty-one Con- 
ditions of Admission”: 

“The Communist Party (of the USA) must carry on a 
clear-cut program of propaganda for the hindering of the 
transportation of munitions of war to the enemies of the 
Soviet Republic.” 

“The program (of the U.S. Communist Party) must be 
sanctioned by the regular congress of the Communist Inter- 
national.” 

“All decisions of the Communist International . . . are 
binding upon all parties belonging to the Communist Inter- 
national (which would include the U.S. Communist Party).” 

“The duty of spreading Communist ideas includes the 
special obligation to carry on a vigorous and systematic prop- 
aganda in the Army. Where this agitation is forbidden by 
exceptional laws, it is to be carried on illegally.” 

“Every party wishing to belong to the Communist Inter- 
national must systematically and persistently develop a Com- 
munist agitation within the trade-unions.” 

It was basic commitments such as these which led the 
U.S. Subversive Activities Control Board to make the fol- 
lowing statement in 1953 after extended hearings : 


Communism in (he United States 


“We find upon the whole record that the evidence pre- 
ponderantly establishes that Respondent’s leaders (leaders 
of the Communist Party, USA) and its members consider 
the allegiance they owe to the United States as subordinate 
to their loyalty and obligations to the Soviet Union.” 5 


The First Wave of Communist Violence 
Strikes the United States 

Beginning April 28, 1919, a series of 36 bombs were dis- 
covered in the mails addressed to such persons as the Attorney 
General, Justice Holmes of the Supreme Court, J. P. Morgan, 
John D. Rockefeller and similar persons of prominence. One 
of the bombs got through to the home of Senator Hardwick 
who had been trying to shut off the migration of Bolsheviks 
to the U.S. A servant opened the package and the bomb ex- 
ploded, blowing off her hands. 

On September 16, 1920, a large bomb was carried in a 
horse-drawn carriage to the corner of Broad and Wall Streets 
in New York City — the vortex of American capitalism. The 
vehicle was brought to a halt across the street from the un- 
ostentatious three-story limestone building occupied by the 
firm of J. P. Morgan and Company. 

Suddenly a great roar went up from the carriage, and 
blue-white flame shot into the sky. The bomb exploded with 
tremendous violence, killing thirty people outright and injur- 
ing hundreds more. It wrecked the interior of the Morgan 
offices, smashed windows for blocks around and shot an iron 
slug through a window on the thirty-fourth floor of the Equit- 
able Building. 

These acts of murder and violence created a blistering 
resentment against the Bolsheviks in every part of the United 
States. Occasionally counter-violence was used by aroused 
citizens in retaliation. Numerous arrests were made by the 


5 Final Report of the Subversive Activities Control Board, April 
20, 1953, p. 208. 


The Naked Communist 


138 


Attorney General and finally a whole shipload of Bolshevik 
aliens and Communist leaders were deported to Russia via 
Finland on the S. S. Buford. Aboard the boat was the notori- 
ous Emma Goldman whose anarchist speeches a quarter of a 
century earlier had induced Leon Czolgosz to assassinate Presi- 
dent McKinley. Little did she know that in twenty-four 
months she would not only repudiate Lenin and his Bolsheviks 
but that by 1940 her great last hope would be to die in the 
United States. 


William Z. Foster Launches the Communist 
Labor Union Drive 

Few names among Communist leaders today are better 
known to the American public than the name of William Z. 
Foster. He was a charter member of the party in the United 
States and was the person designated by the party to take 
over the U.S. labor unions. Most of the money for the cam- 
paign came from Moscow where the Prof intern (Red Inter- 
national of Trade Unions) had received $1,000,000 from the 
Soviet Government to help spread Communism in the labor 
unions of other nations. 

Foster’s drive hit the labor front soon after the armistice, 
when the workers were already in a state of agitation result- 
ing from wartime conditions. Foster found little difficulty 
in sparking strikes in several important industries and even 
where he had nothing to do with a strike he was often given 
the credit. As a result, many people began to identify their 
pro-labor sympathies with Communism without completely 
realizing it. The coal miners were believed to have come 
under Foster’s influence when they voted enthusiastically to 
have the coal industry nationalized and a similar label seemed 
to attach itself to the steel strike because Foster was very 
much in evidence as an agitator and promoter of the strike. 
Many people knew that both the coal miners and the steel 
workers had many legitimate reasons for striking and to them 


Communism in the United States 


the fact that Foster and his Communist associates seized this 
opportunity to worm their way into the labor movement 
seemed of little importance. 

But William Z. Foster never really concealed his funda- 
mental ambition to overthrow the United States government 
by violence and subordinate the American laborer (as well 
as every other American) to the mandates of a Communist 
dictatorship copied after the Russian pattern. In fact, Mr. 
Foster visualized himself as the coming dictator. He was the 
Communist candidate for President on two occasions and 
wrote a book called Toward Soviet America, telling just 
how the Communists would take over. 

When a Congressional committee placed him under oath 
and asked him about Communism, he was voluble and frank : 

the chairman : “Do the Communists in this country 
advocate world revolution?” 

MR. FOSTER: “Yes.” 

the chairman: “Do they (the Communists) advocate 
revolution in this country?” 

MR. foster: “I have stated that the Communists advo- 
cate abolition of the capitalist system in this country and 
every other country. . . .” 

the chairman : “Now, are the Communists in this 
country opposed to our republican form of government?” 

mr. foster: “The capitalist Democracy — most assuredly.” 

THE chairman : “What you advocate is a change of our 
republican form of government and the substituting of the 
soviet form of government?” 

MR. FOSTER : “I have stated that a number of times.” 

the chairman: “Now, if I understand you, the work- 
ers in this country look upon the Soviet Union as their country ; 
is that right?” 

MR. foster: “The more advanced workers do.” 

the chairman: “They look upon the Soviet flag as their 
flag?” 

MR. FOSTER: “The workers of this country and the 
workers of every country have only one flag and that is the 
red flag.” 


The Naked Communist 


the chairman : . If they had to choose between the 

red flag and the American flag, I take it from you that you 
would choose the red flag, is that correct ?” 

MR. foster: “I have stated my answer.” 
the chairman : ‘‘I don’t want to force you to answer 
if it embarrasses you, Mr. Foster.” 

MR. foster: “It does not embarrass me at all. I stated 
very clearly the red flag is the flag of the revolutionary class, 
and we are part of the revolutionary class.” 6 

From 1921 to 1924, members of the Communist Party 
sought to avoid arrest by operating underground, but when the 
wartime emergency acts were repealed the Communist leaders 
gradually surfaced again and continued their campaign for 
a revolution to overthrow the United States government. 

However, during the next few years the general psychol- 
ogy of the country was not particularly security conscious. 
It was an era of fads, frivolity and general post-war frenzy. 
The national scene was entirely too prosperous and intoxicat- 
ing to worry about a few fanatic-minded men who wanted 
to rule the world. Somehow or other the word “Communist” 
began to have a far-away flavor, and people jokingly spoke of 
the former years of bomb-throwing, strikes, arrests and de- 
portations as the days of “the great Red scare.” 

However, a fertile field for future Communist conquests 
was being developed among the very people who feared it least. 
The United States was going sophisticated in an atmosphere 
of half-baked intellectualism. Pedestals of the past crumbled 
to the cry of scandal and the rattling of closeted skeletons. An 
age of daring debunking had arrived. At the time few people 
realized that the economic and spiritual collapse toward which 
the nation was drifting would produce an intellectual revolt 
that would permit the agents of Communism to propel them- 
selves into every echelon of American society — including some 
of the highest offices of the United States Government. 

This brings us to the story of Whittaker Chambers. Be- 

6 Excerpts from the report of the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities to the 76th Congress, January 3, 1939, pp. 18-21. 


Communism in the United States 


cause Chambers was converted to Communism during this 
period and worked himself up to the highest levels of intrigue 
as a leader of Russian espionage, his disclosures give a sweep- 
ing panoramic picture of the growth of Communism in the 
United States from 1925-1938. 


The Growth of U.S. Communism as Seen by 
Whittaker Chambers 


A brief review of Whittaker Chambers’ conversion to 
Communism will perhaps reveal an evolutionary pattern which 
was followed by a considerable number of young American 
intellectuals during the Nineteen-Twenties and early Thirties. 

Whittaker Chambers was raised on Long Island not far 
from suburban New York. In the Chambers home was an 
impersonal and disinterested father (a newspaper illustrator), 
an over-loving and therefore overbearing mother (who had 
formerly been an actress), an insane grandmother and a 
younger brother toward whom Chambers felt no particular 
fraternal affection. 

Both Chambers and his younger brother came to maturity 
during the hectic post-war period and, like many people of 
their time, both became moral and spiritual casualties. Cham- 
bers’ younger brother returned from college cynical and dis- 
illusioned. He became an alcoholic and finally committed 
suicide. The whole family seemed to have degenerated into 
a pattern of life which was precisely the mess of purposeless 
pottage that Marx and Engels had declared it to be. Whittaker 
Chambers describes his own experiences as follows: 

“When I entered (college shortly after World War I) I 
was a conservative in my view of life and politics, and I was 
undergoing a religious experience. By the time I left, entirely 
by my own choice, I was no longer a conservative and I had 
no religion. I had published in a campus literary magazine 
an atheist playlet. . . . The same year, I went to Europe and 
saw Germany in the manic throes of defeat. I returned to 


The Naked Communist 


Columbia, this time paying my own way. In 1925, I volun- 
tarily withdrew for the express purpose of joining the Com- 
munist Party. For I had come to believe that the world we 
live in was dying, that only surgery could now save the wreck- 
age of mankind, and that the Communist Party was history’s 
surgeon.” 7 

Chambers went to work for Communism in real earnest. 
He became co-editor of The Textile Worker, wrote for 
the Daily Worker, took a Communist “wife” and learned 
the strike tactics of trade union violence. He writes that dur- 
ing this period, “I first learned that the Communist Party 
employed gangsters against the fur bosses in certain strikes. 
... I first learned how Communist union members would lead 
their own gangs of strikers into scab shops and in a few 
moments slash to pieces with their sharp-hooked fur knives 
thousands of dollars worth of mink skins.” 8 

It was his intention to make the Communist program the 
permanent pattern of his life. Before long, however, his 
Communist “wife” left him to go her own way and Chambers 
felt it would be more to his liking to make his next union 
(which took place in 1931) an official “bourgeois marriage” 
at some city hall. At this stage, Chambers would never have 
guessed that he also had other sensibilities which would one 
day take him out of Communism and make him senior editor 
of Time magazine at a salary of around $30,000 per year ! 

In 1928, Chambers saw the first series of purges in the 
American Communist Party. For several years, the party 
had been dominated by Charles E. Ruthenburg, “the American 
Lenin.” When Ruthenburg suddenly died there was a mad 
scramble for power. Jay Lovestone came out on top with 
William Z. Foster representing a small, noisy minority. But 
soon Lovestone made a serious political mistake. He sided 
with one of Stalin’s most powerful Russian opponents. Nikolai 
Bukharin, who stood for a less violent program than Stalin 
had in mind. Lovestone and William Z. Foster were sum- 


i Chambers, Whittaker, “witness,” p. 16i. 
8 Chambers, Whittaker, “witness,” p. 229. 


Communism in the United States 


moned to Moscow. When they returned, Lovestone was a 
broken man. He had been called a traitor by Stalin and 
thrown out of the party. Stalin had named Foster the heir 
to the throne. The next step was to force every member of 
the party in the United States to support Foster’s radical 
program or be expelled. Most Communists picked up the 
new set of signals from Moscow and immediately swore alle- 
giance to Foster. But not so with Chambers. It looked to 
him as though Stalin were behaving exactly like a Fascist 
dictator by forcing the majority of the American Communists 
to follow leadership they had already voted against. Chambers 
stopped being active in the party. 

For two years, by his own choice, Chambers remained 
outside the regular ranks. He was never expelled, nor did 
his loyalty to Communism change, but he deeply resented 
Stalin. The entire situation was changed, however, by the 
great depression. Chambers’ sympathies for the unemployed 
once more drew him back toward the party program. He also 
felt forced to admit that from all appearances the long-pre- 
dicted collapse of American capitalism had arrived. In the 
spirit of the times, Chambers wrote a story called, “Can You 
Hear the Voices?” It was a great success. It was made into 
a play, published as a pamphlet and hailed by Moscow as 
splendid revolutionary literature. The next thing Chambers 
knew he was being feted by the American Communist Party 
as though he had never left it. Chambers soon went back 
to work for the revolution. 

It was in June, 1932, that Chambers was asked to pay 
the full price of being a Communist. The Party nominated 
him to serve as a spy against the United States in the employ- 
ment of the Soviet Military Intelligence. For the sake of his 
wife Chambers tried to get out of this assignment, but a 
member of the Central Committee in New York told him, 
“You have no choice.” 

Chambers soon found himself under the iron discipline 
of the Russian espionage apparatus. Because Communism had 
become his faith, Chambers blindly followed instructions. He 
became expert in the conspiratorial techniques of clandestine 


The Naked Communist 


meetings, writing secret documents, shaking off followers, 
trusting no one, being available day and night at the beck 
and call of superiors. 

Before long Chambers was assigned to be the key contact 
man for Russia’s most important spy cell in Washington, D.C. 
Chambers has described his espionage associations with the 
following persons who were later to become top officials in 
the United States Government : 

1. ALGER Hiss whom Chambers says became a close per- 
sonal friend. Hiss started out in the Department of Agricul- 
ture, then served on the Special Senate Committee investigat- 
ing the munitions industry. For awhile he served in the 
Department of Justice and then went to the State Depart- 
ment. There he made a meteoric rise, serving as Director of 
the highly important office of Political Affairs. He served as 
advisor to President Roosevelt at Yalta and as Secretary- 
General of the International Assembly which created the 
United Nations. 

2. harry DEXTER white who later became Assistant Sec- 
retary of the United States Treasury and author of the Mor- 
genthau Plan. 

3. JOHN J. abt who served in the Department of Agri- 
culture, the WPA, the Senate Committee on Education and 
Labor and was then made a Special Assistant to the Attorney 
General in charge of the trial section. 

4. HENRY H. collins who served in the NRA, the De- 
partment of Agriculture, the Department of Labor, and the 
Department of State. During World War II he became a 
major in the Army and in 1948 became Executive Director 
of the American Russian Institute (cited by the Attorney 
General as a Communist front organization). 

5. Charles Kramer who served in the National Labor 
Relations Board, the Office of Price Administration, and in 
1943 joined the staff of the Senate Sub-committee on War 
Mobilization. 

6. NATHAN WITT who served in the Department of Agri- 
culture and then became the Secretary of the National Labor 
Relations Board. 


Communism in the United States 


7. Harold ware who served in the Department of Agri- 
culture. 

8. victor perlo who served in the Office of Price Ad- 
ministration, the War Production Board, and the Treasury. 

9. henry Julian wadleigh who became a prominent of- 
ficial in the Treasury Department. 

Chambers testified that he received so many confidential 
government documents through his contacts that it took the 
continuous efforts of two and sometimes three photographers 
to microfilm the material and keep it flowing to Russia. Cham- 
bers says he considered Alger Hiss his number one source of 
information. He has described how Hiss would bring home 
a brief case each night filled with material from the State 
Department. Some of these documents would be microfilmed. 
Others would be copied by Hiss on his typewriter or he would 
make summaries in longhand. It was a number of these typed 
documents and memos in the certified handwriting of Alger 
Hiss which became famous as the “Pumpkin Papers” and 
subsequently convicted Hiss of perjury. 

In later years when Chambers was asked to give his ex- 
planation as to why so many well-educated Americans were 
duped into committing acts of subversion against their native 
country, he explained that once a person has been converted 
to the ideology of Communism he will consider espionage to 
be a moral act — a duty — committed in the name of humanity 
for the good of future society. 

The unbelievable extent to which Americans participated 
in Russian-directed espionage against the United States dur- 
ing the depression and during World War II has only recently 
become generally recognized. Many complete books have 
now been written which summarize the evidence unearthed 
by the FBI, the courts and Congress. 

Whittaker Chambers Breaks with Communism 

In 1938, at the very height of his career as a Russian 
courier and contact man, Chambers found his philosophy of 


The Naked Communist 


146 materialism collapsing. It was one morning while feeding his 
small daughter that Chambers suddenly realized as he watched 
her that the delicate yet immense complexity of the human 
body and human personality could not possibly be explained 
in terms of accumulated accident. Chambers dated his break 
with Communism from that moment. 

At first he was highly disturbed and tried to thrust the 
new conviction from his mind, but as he opened his thinking 
to the evidence around him he finally became completely per- 
suaded that he was living in a universe of amazingly immacu- 
late design which was subject to the creative supervision of a 
supreme intelligence. Consequently, just as Communist phil- 
osophy had brought him into the movement its collapse made 
him determined to get out. It was many months later before 
he finally disentangled himself and ran away from the Soviet 
Intelligence Service. 

Chambers says that when he ultimately made his break 
with Communism he did everything in his power to get his 
close friend, Alger Hiss, to leave with him. Alger Hiss, how- 
ever, not only refused but, according to Chambers heatedly 
denounced him for trying to influence him. 

From watching the fate of others, Chambers already had 
some idea of what it meant to try and leave the conspiratorial 
apparatus of Communism. Nevertheless, the course he fol- 
lowed brought physical and mental suffering that not even 
he had suspected. 

Today, no more complete account of the agonizing ex- 
periences of those who dare to wear the badge of an ex-Com- 
munist can be found than that contained in the pages of 
Chambers’ autobiography, Witness. At one point he worked 
with a gun beside him for fear the Russian secret police 
would take his life just as they were doing to so many 
others. At another point he tried to take his own life to keep 
from having to expose those who had formerly been his most 
intimate friends. Most of these details can only be appreciated 
in their full text. For our purposes it is sufficient to point 
out that up until the time Chambers did finally make up his 
mind to tell the whole story, the American public was almost 


Communism in the United States 


completely unaware of the vast network of spy activities which 
Russia had built into every strata of American society. And 
tnis unfortunate condition existed even though the FBI had 
been carefully gathering facts and warning government offi- 
cials concerning Communist activities for many years. 

Finally, a cloud of witnesses confirmed that it was true. 


Elizabeth Bentley Takes Over 
After Chambers Leaves 

Chambers had no way of knowing that after he deserted 
the Russian espionage system, the Soviets would replace him 
with a woman. Her name was Elizabeth Bentley. 

She came from a long line of New England American an- 
cestors. She had attended Vassar, traveled and studied in 
Italy for a year and returned to the United States in 1934 to 
find the country deep in a depression. Having failed to get a 
job, she decided her only chance was to learn a business course 
so she enrolled at the School of Business at Columbia Uni- 
versity. There she met up with a number of people who were 
friendly and sympathetic toward her. It was quite some time 
before she knew they were Communists. As these friends 
explained Communism to her it seemed rather reasonable — in 
fact, the way they explained it. Communism would be a great 
improvement over American Capitalism (which at that mo- 
ment was bogged down like an iceberg with unemployment 
and bankruptcy). So Elizabeth Bentley became a Communist. 
She entered the campaign with all the zeal that could come 
from a girl in her twenties who suddenly believes that a new 
era of history is about to open up which will solve all of hu- 
manity’s problems. 

For some time Elizabeth Bentley worked in New York’s 
Welfare Department and while there she was made the finan- 
cial secretary of the Columbia University Communist unit. 
She attended the Communist Workers’ School and joined so 
many front organizations under different names that on at 


The Naked Communist 


least one occasion she went to a meeting and could not re- 
member who she was supposed to be ! 

Before long the activities of Elizabeth Bentley had at- 
tracted the leaders of the Russian underground apparatus 
and before she really knew what had happened to her she 
had been carefully shifted from the day-to-day assignments of 
the U.S. Communist Party to the underground network of 
Soviet espionage. 

She worked for three different individuals before she was 
finally assigned to an over-worked, old-time revolutionary 
called “Timmy.” Elizabeth Bentley fell in love with Timmy. 

One day he said to her: “You and I have no right to feel 
the way we do about each other. . . . There is only one way 
out, and that is to stick together and keep our relationship 
unknown to everyone. ... You will have to take me com- 
pletely on faith, without knowing who I am, where I live, or 
what I do for a living.” 

This was how Elizabeth Bentley became the Communist 
wife of a man who turned out to be Jacob Golos, one of the 
all-powerful chiefs of the Russian Secret Police in the United 
States. 

Under his training Elizabeth Bentley became what she 
later called a “steeled Bolshevik.” 

In May, 1940, she read that an attempt had been made 
against the life of Leon Trotsky in Mexico. The attempt had 
failed but his personal bodyguard had been kidnaped and shot 
in the back. For years Stalin had been trying to liquidate his 
old enemy and from the way Jacob Golos behaved Elizabeth 
Bentley knew her Communist mate was in on the plot. Several 
months later a killer actually got through to Trotsky and 
smashed his skull with an alpenstock. 

Beginning in 1941, Elizabeth Bentley was used by the 
Russian espionage apparatus to collect material from con- 
tacts in Washington, D.C. She says she first became the 
courier for the Silvermaster spy group which was extracting 
information from Communist contacts in the Pentagon and 
other top-secret governmental agencies. Before she was 


Communism in the United States 


through she had picked up nearly all of Whittaker Chambers’ 
former contacts and many more besides. 

Occasionally there was near disaster, as was the case just 
after Gregory Silvermaster got a job with the Board of Eco- 
nomic Warfare through the influence of Lauchlin Currie (an 
administrative assistant at the White House). She says that 
after taking the job he was shown a letter addressed to his 
superior from the head of Army Intelligence indicating that 
the FBI and Naval Intelligence had proof of his Communist 
connections. The letter demanded that Silvermaster be dis- 
charged. The panicky Silvermaster asked Elizabeth Bentley 
what to do. She gave him the same instruction that other 
exposed Communists were being given: “Stand your ground, 
put on an air of injured innocence; you are not a Communist, 
just a ‘progressive’ whose record proves you have always 
fought for the rights of labor. Rally all your ‘liberal’ friends 
around. ... If necessary, hire a lawyer to fight the case 
through on the grounds that your reputation has been badly 
damaged. Meanwhile, pull every string you can to get this 
business quashed. Use Currie, White (Harry Dexter White, 
top official of the Treasury Department), anybody else you 
know and trust.” 9 

Anyone familiar with the format of defense followed by 
suspected Communists who were hailed before Congressional 
investigating committees will immediately recognize the 
Party’s trade mark on the trite pretension of abused innocence 
recommended by Elizabeth Bentley. When one considers its 
relatively naive and childlike simplicity it is almost a cause 
for national chagrin that it confused and deceived such an 
amazing number of people for such an inexplicable number of 
years. As with practically all of the others Elizabeth Bent- 
ley’s suggestions paid off handsomely for Silvermaster and he 
soon gained support from many powerful and unexpected 
sources. 

After three months of “fighting back” the Under-Secre- 
tary of War became convinced from hearing various pleas that 


» Bentley, Elizabeth, “OUT OF bondage,” pp. 173-17 4. 


The Naked Communist 


an injustice had been done to Silvermaster and therefore or- 
dered his dismissal cancelled. Silvermaster was allowed to re- 
sign and return to his old job in the Department of Agriculture 
with a clean slate. Elizabeth Bentley concludes by saying, 
“After a sigh of relief that must have echoed throughout the 
entire Russian Secret Police apparatus, we went back to our 
normal routine.” 

According to the sworn testimony of Elizabeth Bentley, 
she worked with three major spy cells. The first was the 
“Ware Cell” — the same group Chambers had handled. In 
addition she handled the “Silvermaster Cell” and the “Perlo 
Cell.” She said these three cells were charged with the task of 
supplying her with an almost endless stream of information 
for transmittal to Moscow. She testified under oath that the 
members of the Silvermaster Cell and the Perlo Cell were as 
follows (the departments in which the members were working 
during the time she had contact with them are also listed) : 


THE SILVERMASTER CELL 


1. NATHAN GREGORY silvermaster served as Director of 
the Labor Division of the Farm Security Administration ; was 
detailed for a short period to the Board of Economic Warfare. 

2. solomon adler served in the Treasury Department as 
an agent to China. 

3. NORMAN BURSLER worked in the Department of Jus- 
tice as a special assistant. 

4. frank COE worked as Assistant Director, Division of 
Monetary Research, Treasury Department; special assistant 
to the United States Ambassador in London ; assistant to the 
Executive Director, Board of Economic Warfare; Assistant 
Administrator, Foreign Economic Administration. 

5. WILLIAM GOLD, known also as Bela Gold, worked as as- 
sistant head of the Division of Program Surveys, Bureau of 
Agricultural Economics, Department of Agriculture; Senate 
Subcommittee on War Mobilization; Office of Economic Pro- 
grams in Foreign Economic Administration. 


Communism in the United States 


6. MRS. william (sonia) gold worked as research as- 
sistant, House Select Committee on Interstate Migration; 
labor-market analyst. Bureau of Employment Security; Div- 
ision of Monetary Research, Treasury Department. 

7. abraham george Silverman served as Director of the 
Bureau of Research and Information Services, U.S. Railroad 
Retirement Board ; economic adviser and chief of analysis and 
plans, Assistant Chief of Air Staff, Materials and Services, 
U.S. Air Force. 

8. william taylor worked in the Treasury Department. 

9. WILLIAM LUDWIG ULLMAN worked in the Division of 
Monetary Research, Treasury Department ; Material and Serv- 
ice Division, Air Corps Headquarters, Pentagon. 


PERLO CELL 


1. victor perlo (also connected with the Ware Cell), 
worked as the head of a branch in the Research Section, Office 
of Price Administration; served the War Production Board 
handling problems relating to military aircraft production. 
(In 1951 he wrote a book on American Imperialism and on 
page 220 declared: “The USSR, the People’s Democracies, and 
China lead the world struggle for peace.”) 

2. Edward J. Fitzgerald served on the War Production 
Board. 

3. harold glasser served in the Treasury Department, 
loaned to the government of Ecuador; loaned to the War 
Production Board; worked as adviser on North African Af- 
fairs Committee in Algiers, North Africa. 

4. Charles kramer (also connected with the Ware Cell), 
worked for the National Labor Relations Board; Office of 
Price Administration; economist with the Senate Subcom- 
mittee on War Mobilization. 

5. SOLOMON leshinsky worked for the United States 
Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. 

6. harry MAGDOFF worked for the Statistical Division 


The Naked Communist 


152 of the War Production Board and the Office of Emergency 
Management; the Bureau of Research and Statistics of the 
W.P.B., the Tools Division of W.P.B. and the Bureau of 
Foreign and Domestic Commerce. 

7. Allan eosenberg worked in the Foreign Economic 
Administration. 

8. DONALD NIVEN wheeler worked in the Office of Stra- 
tegic Services. 

In addition, Elizabeth Bentley named the following 
individuals who cooperated in obtaining information from 
government files even though they were not tied in to any 
particular cell : 

1. MICHAEL greenburg — Board of Economic Warfare; 
Foreign Economic Administration, specialist on China. 

2. JOSEPH GREGG — Coordinator of Inter- American affairs, 
assistant in Research Division. 

3. Maurice halperin — Office of Strategic Services ; head 
of Latin American Division in the Research and Analysis 
Branch ; head of Latin American research and analysis, State 
Department. 

4. j. julius Joseph — Office of Strategic Services, Japa- 
nese Division. 

5. DUNCAN CHAPLIN LEE— Office of Strategic Services; 
legal adviser to General William J. Donovan. 

6. ROBERT T. MILLER— Head of political research, Co- 
ordinator of Inter- American Affairs ; member, Information 
Service Committee, Near Eastern Affairs, State Department; 
Assistant Chief, Division of Research and Publications, State 
Department. 

7. william z. park — Coordinator of Inter- American Af- 
fairs. 

8. Bernard redmont — Coordinator of Inter-American 
Affairs. 

9. HELEN TENNEY— Office of Strategic Services, Spanish 
Division. 

These lists of names are set forth to illustrate the remark- 
able and devastating pipelines of information which Elizabeth 


Communism in the United States 


Bentley says the Soviet underground tapped in Washington 
during the time she served as the Russian Secret Police pay- 
master and courier in the nation’s capital. 

Elizabeth Bentley worked doggedly for the Soviets until 
1944. However, a great shock had come to her in 1943 when 
Jacob Golos died suddenly of a heart atack on Thanksgiving 
eve. Just before his death, Golos revealed to her the ruth- 
lessness of his Soviet superiors who were driving him un- 
mercifully and forcing him to engage in activities which were 
nauseating even to the revolutionary-hardened sense of his 
own calloused conscience. 

And after Golos’ death further disillusionment came to 
Elizabeth Bentley when she learned that Earl Browder had 
agreed to turn over a group of American Communists in Wash- 
ington to a most unscrupulous set of Soviet espionage agents. 
When she challenged Browder, he reportedly told her, “Don’t 
be naive. You know that when the cards are down, I have 
to take my orders from them. I just hoped I could sidetrack 
them in this particular matter, but it didn’t work out.” 

“But Greg’s an old friend of yours,” Elizabeth Bentley 
said (referring to a member of the group). 

“So what?” replied Browder. “He’s expendable.” 

Shortly afterwards Elizabeth Bentley was surprised by a 
visit from a top Soviet official from Moscow who told her she 
had been awarded the highest medal of the Soviet Union — the 
Order of the Red Star. But she was not nearly so impressed 
by the proffered honor as she was disgusted and revolted by 
the kind of individual the Soviet official turned out to be. 
From that moment on she felt that the Communist leaders in 
Russia were absolutely incapable of building a great new 
world — no matter how much information she sent them. 

The final blow to her idealism came when the Soviets tried 
to force her to turn over to them a girl-friend who was wanted 
for the immoral role of an entertainer for high government 
officials. 

One night, alone, Elizabeth Bentley challenged herself, 
“What has happened to all of us who started out so gallantly 
to build a new world?” Deep inside herself she was finally 


The Naked Communist 


154 able to admit what had happened. “We had been corrupted 
and smashed by a machine more merciless than anything the 
world had ever seen.” 

Many weeks later, Elizabeth Bentley finally walked into 
the FBI ready to do everything in her power to make amends 
to her native country. 

In some ways it was simultaneously a triumph and a 
tragedy. For her, personally, it was a triumph. It was the 
chance she needed to square herself with her conscience and 
her country. However, in 1948, when she gave her sworn 
testimony before a congressional committee, it threatened 
to become a tragedy. The Communist press was joined by 
many so-called “liberal” factions to accuse her of being every- 
thing from a degenerate to a psychopathic liar or a victim of 
insanity. It took time and corroborative testimony of many 
witnesses to finally halt the clamor. 

Elizabeth Bentley and Whittaker Chambers have testified 
that they were both typical members of a small but extremely 
dangerous segment of Americans who, through misguided 
ideologies, swelled the ranks of Communism during the inter- 
val betwen World War I and the close of World War II. The 
vast majority passed through the same evolution — first, an 
ideological conversion followed by a desire to take action; 
secondly, an exposure to the hard-core realities of Communism 
in actual operation; and finally, an awakening followed by a 
dynamic determination to desert the delusion and fight it from 
the outside. Fortunately for America, as well as for its citi- 
zens who served the Communist cause, these erstwhile mem- 
bers of the party usually returned to the American way of 
life more loyal to its principles than when they left. Only 
a few have still refused to open their eyes and ears to all that 
has been revealed. This unreclaimed group still labors day 
and night in a dedicated service to “the cause.” 



VIII 

Communism and World War II 


While Communist espionage channels were being perfected in 
the United States, similar subversive networks were being 
built throughout the world. Soon Stalin found the state secrets 
of all the major powers pouring in so fast that he was able 
to play the world-wide game of power politics like a profes- 
sional gambler who sits at the poker table carefully planning 
his strategy as he reads the marked cards held by each of 
the other players. 

We now know that it was from this supremely satisfying 
position of political omniscience that Stalin initiated a series 
of schemes which had their part in precipitating World War II. 
Defected Russian Intelligence officers have revealed that 
World War II was fomented and used by the Russian leaders 
as an important part of the long-range strategy for the ex- 
pansion of World Communism. 

This chapter will answer the following questions: 

What is the explanation for Stalin’s attempt to reach a 
secret understanding with Hitler in 1933? 

Why did Stalin claim credit for starting World War II? 


The Naked Communist 


Why did Stalin’s pact with Hitler in 1939 surprise Com- 
munists throughout the world ? 

Was Stalin caught off guard when Hitler scrapped the 
pact and attacked Russia? 

What was the U.S. attitude during the early months of 
the Nazi invasion of Russia? What changed that attitude? 

What do you deduct from this statement in 1942 by a 
Presidential advisor: “Generations unborn will owe a great 
measure of their freedom to the unconquerable power of the 
Soviet people” ? Did Allied leaders appear to have had a basic 
understanding of Communist strategy? 

How did the Communist leaders use Lend-Lease to get 
atomic bomb secrets? 

When did U.S. coexistence with Communism begin? Name 
the four steps of degeneration through which it passed. On 
what presumption was Russia made a full partner with the 
U.S. in shaping the post-war world? 

How do you account for the fact that the United Nations 
Charter follows the format of the Russian Constitution of 1936 
rather than the format of the League of Nations? Would you 
feel there was any significance in the fact that the general 
secretary for the organization which drew up the charter was 
Alger Hiss? 

What was the attitude of the Communist leaders when 
they emerged from World War II as the second greatest 
political power on earth? 

The Rise of Adolf Hitler and Nazism in Germany 

It is said that Communism was largely responsible for 
the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. It will be recalled 
that when the German Kaiser capitulated in 1918 the Com- 
munists tried to take over Germany. Anti-communist politi- 
cal groups immediately sprang up and through a frantic coali- 
tion they prevented the Communists from seizing power. It 
was in this anti-Communist atmosphere that Adolf Hitler be- 
gan his political career. He joined the National Socialists 


Communism and World War II 


(Nazi) Party which had a strong anti-Bolshevik platform and 
by 1921 he had become its leader. 

Hitler organized his notorious Nazi Storm Troopers to 
retaliate against a spreading rash of Communist violence. 
He had his Brown Shirts trained in street fighting, rioting 
and the suppression of political opponents by direct physical 
attack. By 1923 the Storm Troopers numbered 10,000 and 
Hitler felt strong enough to try and take over the German 
province of Bavaria. But this uprising failed. Hitler was 
thrown into prison and while there began expressing his 
frustrated ambitions in a feverish manuscript on total war 
called Mein Kampf — My Battle. In this book Hitler revealed 
that he was not only bitterly anti-communistic but that he 
stood for outright violation of the Treaty of Versailles. He 
said he would fight for the complete restoration of Germany 
as a world power. He was planning for the creation of a great 
Nordic empire embracing all the people of German blood in 
Europe regardless of their national residence. Mein Kampf 
constituted a threat to every nation bordering on Germany. 
It also contained a threat against Russia because Hitler de- 
clared that the natural course of German expansion would 
eventually carry the Nazi conquest into the fertile Ukrainian 
agricultural region and then into the rich Russian oil fields. 

Later as Stalin watched Hitler cudgel and jostle his way 
into power he recognized in the Nazi dictator a formidable op- 
ponent of his own breed and kind. He saw that Hitler was 
shrewd and ruthless. He was completely amoral. He had no 
compunction whatever against violence, the purging of his own 
people, the use of deceit in propaganda, nor the sacrifice of 
millions of lives to achieve personal power. Materialism had 
produced precisely the same product in Germany that it had 
produced in Russia. Although called by different names 
Nazism and Communism were aimed at the same identical 
mark and were forged in very similar ideological molds. 

Perhaps this explains why Stalin secretly tried to ne- 
gotiate a personal understanding with Hitler shortly after the 
latter came into power during 1933. One of Stalin’s leading 
secret agents, General W. G. Krivitsky, has furnished the de- 


The Naked Communist 


tails of these efforts. 1 When Stalin’s gestures of friendship 
were rejected by Hitler, Stalin knew the German Fuehrer 
could be dealt with only as an outright enemy. 

Stalin then hastened to gain the sympathies of the democ- 
racies. He attempted to identify Russia’s policies with the 
political and economic welfare of freedom-loving people in 
other nations. He called this campaign the “Popular Front.” 
At the Seventh World Congress of the International in 1935, 
he instructed loyal Communists in every country to combine 
with any political groups which opposed Hitler and his allies — 
even right wing parties which the Communists had previously 
attacked. Judged by its results, the “Popular Front” was the 
most successful tactic ever adopted by Communist strategists. 
It permitted Communists to associate openly with the most 
conservative and highly respected political groups in capitalist 
countries. 


The Communists Claim Credit for Starting 
World War II 

In 1938 Stalin watched closely as Hitler decided to test 
the temper of the Western Allies by occupying all of Austria. 
When no serious consequences resulted, the Fuehrer prepared 
to assimilate other areas along the German borders. At 
Munich he threatened to blitzkrieg Europe unless England and 
France let him take over the industrial section of Czecho- 
slovakia. When they agreed, he immediately extended his 
occupation to nearly all of that valiant little country. 

In 1939 Hitler seized Memelland in Lithuania and then 
prepared to march into Poland. However, at this point he 
hesitated. Russia wanted Poland, too. As a matter of fact, 
Russia held the balance of power in Europe and Hitler did 
not dare take steps which would start an all-out war in the 
West unless he could be assured that Russia would not inter- 


1 This chapter in Stalin-Hitler relations is discussed by General 
Krivitsky in his book, “in stalin’s secret service.” 


Communism and World War II 


fere. Hitler, therefore, made overtures to Stalin to sign a 
nonaggression pact. To the astonishment of the whole world, 
Stalin accepted ! This meant that Hitler could go to war with 
the assurance that Russia would not interfere. 

This caught most of the Communist world completely off 
guard. For years Red propaganda had portrayed Stalin as 
the world’s leading opponent of Nazism and Fascism. Now 
Stalin’s regime had ratified a pact with the Nazis which gave 
them a carte blanche to start a war in the West. 

In America it took the Communist press several days to 
get their propaganda in reverse. Whittaker Chambers says 
it was absolutely incomprehensible to American Communists 
that Stalin would capitulate to his greatest enemy. It was 
not until Chambers talked with Stalin’s former director of 
espionage in Western Europe that he heard the official ex- 
planation. General W. G. Krivitsky said this pact demon- 
strated Stalin’s genius as a strategist. He explained that 
Stalin knew this pact would turn Hitler loose on Europe but 
that he also knew that as the war progressed it was likely that 
the western nations would fight themselves into exhaustion. 
At that point Soviet troops could march in. Almost without 
a blow the Soviet troops would be able to take over all of 
Europe in the name of the dictatorship of the proletariat! 

And just as Stalin had suspected, Hitler was not at all 
slow to take advantage of the political shove Stalin had given 
him. The pact was signed August 23, 1939. By September 1, 
the German Panzers were pouring through the valiant, but 
helpless ranks of the Polish horse cavalry, and thousands of 
tons of bombs were falling on Polish cities. 

Also, as Stalin had expected, England and France were 
immediately dragged into the war because of their commit- 
ments to Poland. This was a war which these countries were 
neither physically nor psychologically prepared to wage. Be- 
fore a year had passed, Poland had been divided between 
Germany and Russia and France had been occupied. Soon 
afterwards the British troops were bombed off the European 
continent at Dunkirk, and the Nazis were then left practically 


The Naked Communist 


without resistance as they expanded their occupation into 
Denmark, Norway, Holland and Belgium. 

Assuming that the war would now settle down to a strug- 
gle between Germany and England, Stalin felt ready to make 
his next carefully calculated move. Only two major capitalist 
nations still remained outside of the conflict: Japan and the 
United States. 

On April 13, 1941, Stalin nudged the Japanese war lords 
into an offensive in the Pacific. This was accomplished by the 
same simple device as that which had turned Hitler loose on 
Europe — a pact. 

At that moment Russia, even more than the United 
States, was the greatest single impediment to Japanese 
expansion in East Asia and the Pacific. By accepting a 
pact with Russia, the Japanese war lords were left free to 
launch their pan-Asiatic campaign in the Pacific and the Far 
East. They made immediate preparations for their attack. 


Stalin Suffers a Strategic Defeat 

Stalin now intended to sit back and wait for the capitalist 
nations to endure their baptism of fire. He had assured the 
Soviet military leaders that World War II would be won by 
the nation which stayed out the longest. That nation, of 
course, must be Russia. What he did not know, however, was 
that Adolf Hitler had been planning a disastrous surprise for 
the Communist Motherland. In fact, at the very moment 
Stalin was promoting his neutrality pact with Japan, Adolf 
Hitler was secretly announcing to his general staff : “The 
German armed forces must be prepared to crush Soviet Russia 
in a quick campaign.” 

The great surprise came on June 22, 1941. Hitler scrapped 
the pact and attacked Russia on a 2,000 mile front with 121 
divisions and 3,000 planes. He had written all about it years 
before in Mein Kampf. 

This sudden blitzkrieg attack changed the history of the 


Communism and World War II 


world. It shattered Stalin’s intention to stay out of the war 
while the capitalistic nations fought themselves to exhaustion. 
It meant that Russia would enter the war prematurely and 
with the most meager preparations. 


World War II Moves Closer to the United States 

To many observers in the United States, this new develop- 
ment in World War II appeared favorable to the interest of 
peace-loving countries. Hitler’s attack on Russia locked the 
world's two greatest aggressor nations in deadly combat and 
even military leaders thought this might relieve future world 
tensions. But within six months the Germans had occupied 
580,000 square miles of the richest land in the U.S.S.R. — land 
originally occupied by more than one third of Russia’s popula- 
tion, and in spite of the “scorched earth” policy of Russia, the 
Nazi troops successfully extracted their supplies from the peo- 
ple and the land so that they were able to race forward without 
waiting to have supply lines established. Soon German Panzers 
had penetrated to a point only sixty miles from Moscow and 
Hitler announced exuberantly that “Russia is already broken 
and will never rise again.” 

All of this shocked the rest of the world into the repre- 
hensible possibility of a Nazi empire which might extend from 
England to Alaska. Instinctively Americans began cheering 
for the Russians. It was considered to be a matter of vital 
self interest, implemented by the traditional American tend- 
ency to cheer for the underdog. 

Then the fatal dawn of Sunday, December 7, 1941, brought 
the devastating attack of the Japanese on Pearl Harbor and 
the United States found herself in the holocaust of World War 
II before she was even halfway prepared. In desperation 
American leaders reached out in all directions for friends. 
It is important to remember that the black boots of Hitler’s 
marching Wehrmacht had pounded a paralyzing fear into the 
hearts of peoples on every continent. It was Nazism — not 


The Naked Communist 


Communism — that was blotting out the light of civilization 
around the earth. Therefore, since Russia had already been 
brought within the orbit of American sympathy, it is not diffi- 
cult to understand how she became an intimate U.S. ally almost 
over night. Somehow it seemed impossible to remember that 
this was the very same Russia that had joined a nonaggression 
pact with Hitler to turn him loose in Europe, and had joined 
a neutrality pact with the Japanese to turn them loose in the 
Pacific. 


The U.S. Policy of Coexistence 
Goes into Its Third Stage 

By the early spring of 1942 it was not only apparent that 
the war had caught U.S. military strength at a very low level, 
but it was also equally obvious that the Axis had practically 
destroyed all of America’s traditional allies. Perhaps, as 
George F. Kennan suggests, this may partially account for the 
desperate gamble taken at that time by certain U.S. diplo- 
matic strategists in dealing with Russia. 

Already the diplomatic navigators had gone from a policy 
of plain coexistence with Communism in 1933, to one step 
lower where they had decided to accept the abuse and the 
broken promises of the Communist leaders. Now they re- 
solved to go even further. They decided to try to convert the 
Communist leaders to the American way of thinking by show- 
ering them with such overwhelming generosity that there 
could be no vestige of suspicion concerning the desire of the 
United States to gain the cooperative support of the Com- 
munist leaders in winning the war and later preserving the 
peace. It was assumed that they would then become per- 
manently and sympathetically allied with the United States 
and the western democracies in building a “one world’’ of 
peace and prosperity. 

If this plan had worked, it would have been truly a master 
stroke of diplomatic genius. Unfortunately, however, it turned 


Communism and World War II 


out to be just what many military officials and heads of intel- 
ligence agencies predicted it would be — the means by which 
Russia would catapult herself into a world power by capital- 
izing on the treasure and prestige of the very nation she most 
desired to destroy. 

Nevertheless, the program was inaugurated and Ameri- 
ca’s attitude toward Russia both during and after World 
War II can only be understood in terms of this policy. 

In early June, 1942, Molotov came secretly to Washington 
and stayed at the White House. After his departure prepara- 
tions were made to break the new U.S. policy to the American 
people. On June 22, 1942, (the anniversary of Hitler’s attack 
on the U.S.S.R.) a Russian Aid Rally was held in New York’s 
Madison Square Garden. There a top government official 
announced: “A second front? Yes, and if necessary, a third 
and a fourth front. ... We are determined that nothing shall 
stop us from sharing with you all that we have and are in this 
conflict, and we look forward to sharing with you the fruits 
of victory and peace.” Then there followed the pathetic, but 
blindly hopeful statement: “Generations unborn will owe a 
great measure of their freedom to the unconquerable power 
of the Soviet people.” 2 


The Story of American Lend-Lease to Russia 

This American policy of generosity immediately began 
to manifest itself. Billions of dollars of Russian Lend-Lease 
were authorized. Even the deliberate sacrifice of American 
self-interest was evident in some of the orders received by 
U.S. military services. An order to the Air Service Command 
dated January 1, 1943, carried this astounding mandate: “The 
modification, equipment, and movement of Russian planes have 
been given first priority, even over planes for the U.S. Army 
Air Forces." 


- Speech of Harry Hopkins quoted in “Roosevelt and hopkins,” by 
Robert E. Sherwood, p. 588. 


The Naked Communist 


The U.S. Congress was not quite as enthusiastic toward 
Russia as the diplomatic strategists. Congress specifically 
restricted Russian Lend-Lease to materials to be used for mili- 
tary action against the Axis enemy. It forbade the shipment 
of materials which would be used for civilian personnel or the 
rehabilitation of Russia after the war. This was in no way 
designed to show unfriendliness toward the Russian people. 
It was simply an expression of belief that U.S. resources 
should not be used to promote Communist Russia into a world 
power. Some day the Russian people would perhaps regain 
their freedom, and that would be the time to share resources. 
Meanwhile, non-military generosity would only strengthen the 
post-war position of the Communist dictatorship. 

In spite of these legal restrictions, however, the unin- 
hibited generosity of the diplomats dominated Lend-Lease 
rather than Congress or the leaders of the Military. 

General John R. Deane, for example, who was in Moscow 
as Chief of the U.S. Military Mission, turned down a Russian 
request for 25 large 200-horsepower Diesel marine engines 
because the engines already sent to Russia were rusting in 
open storage and from all appearances were simply being 
stockpiled for post-war use. Furthermore, the engines were 
badly needed by General MacArthur in the South Pacific. 
After hearing General Deane’s decision, the Russians appealed 
to Harry Hopkins (head of the Lend-Lease program) who over- 
ruled General Deane. During the following two years a total 
of 1,305 of these engines were sent to Russia at a cost to the 
American people of $30,745,947. 

After Pearl Harbor, when Navy officials were given the 
highest possible priority for copper wire to be used in the 
repair of U. S. battleships, they found the Russians had an 
even higher priority for an order of copper wire which was 
apparently to be used for post-war rehabilitation of Russian 
cities. The wire was turned over to the Russians in such 
quantities that it had to be stored on a 20-acre lot in West- 
chester County, New York, where it remained until the war 
was nearly over. A few months before the Armistice, it was 


Communism and World War II 


shipped to Russia for the rehabilitation of their communica- 
tions systems. 

Since the close of World War II, the American people have 
gradually learned the details concerning the flood of goods 
and treasure which went to Russia under Lend-Lease. The 
lists which have been published are from Russian records. 
They were secured by an American officer, Major George 
Racey Jordan, who was the official U. S. expediter for Russian 
Lend-Lease at the Great Falls Air Base in Montana. An 
analysis of these lists showed that according to Russian rec- 
ords, the Communists received over eleven billion dollars worth 
of Lend-Lease and that in spite of the legal restrictions against 
it, the diplomatic strategists included $3,040,423,000 worth 
of American goods, paid for by American taxpayers, which 
definitely does not appear to be authorized by the Lend-Lease 
act. These lists show shipments of vast stockpiles of “non- 
munition” chemicals together with voluminous shipments of 
cigarette cases, phonograph records, ladies’ compacts, sheet 
music, pianos, antique furniture, $388,844 worth of “notions 
and cheap novelties,” women’s jewelry, household furnishings, 
fishing tackle, lipstick, perfumes, dolls, bank vaults, play- 
ground equipment, and quantities of many other types of 
illegal, non-military merchandise. 

Students of Russian wartime history point out that Amer- 
ican Lend-Lease began feeding into Russia at a time when she 
was almost prostrate. She had lost most of her crops as a 
result of the scorched earth campaign designed to slow Nazi 
advances. Even with Lend-Lease food the troops had to be 
rationed at a bare subsistence level so it is likely that without 
Lend-Lease the Russian resistance might well have collapsed. 
Furthermore, the Germany occupation cut the Russians off 
from many of their major industrial centers. In addition to 
U.S. planes, munitions, chemicals, tools, heavy machinery, 
and so forth, the amazing American “Arsenal of Democracy” 
provided Russia with 478,899 motor vehicles. This was 
nearly half of all the motor vehicles used on the Soviet front. 

It is an interesting commentary on the Communist psy- 


The Naked Communist 


chology to note that the United States never received an offi- 
cial “thank you” from Russia for the eleven billion dollars 
worth of Lend-Lease goods which were paid for and literally 
“donated” to the Communist Motherland by the American 
people. Stalin’s excuse was that his government felt the 
United States made an error when it stopped Lend-Lease at 
the close of the war. He made it icy clear that under the cir- 
cumstances his people did not feel an expression of gratitude 
would be either appropriate or justifiable. 


Russian Attempts to Secure the Secrets 
of the Atomic Bomb 


Throughout World War II Russian espionage vigorously 
concentrated on the most important thing to come out of the 
War — the harnessing of atomic energy. A two-pronged thrust 
was employed to get the information as it was developed : one 
by espionage and the other by diplomatic channels. For a 
time the diplomatic channels were particularly productive, 
not only for atomic energy secrets, but for all military and 
industrial information. 

Major Jordan first became aware of this at the Great Falls 
Lend-Lease Air Base when the Russians began bringing large 
quantities of cheap, black suitcases along with them when- 
ever they left the United States. They refused to let Jordan 
see the contents on the grounds that the suitcases were pieces 
of “diplomatic luggage” and therefore immune to inspection. 

One night the Russian commander at the base almost de- 
manded that Jordan go into Great Falls as his dinner guest. 
Jordan was suspicious but accepted. About midnight he re- 
ceived an excited call that a plane had just landed and the 
Soviets were going to take off for Russia without waiting for 
Jordan’s clearance. Jordan raced back to the airfield. Sure 
enough, the plane was a joker. In it were fifty black suitcases 
protected by armed Russian guards. Jordan ordered a GI to 


Communism and World War II 


hold the guards at bay and shoot to kill if they forcibly inter- 
fered with his inspection. 

Jordan later testified under oath before a congressional 
committee that he found each suitcase to contain a file of in- 
formation about U.S. industry, harbors, troops, railroads, 
communications, and so forth. In one suitcase Jordan said 
he found a letter on White House stationery signed by Harry 
Hopkins and addressed to the number three man in the Rus- 
sian hierarchy. Attached to the letter was a map of the top- 
secret Manhattan (atomic energy) Project, together with 
descriptive data dealing with atomic energy experiments! 
One folder in this suitcase had written on it, “From Hiss.” 
At the time Jordan did not know who Hiss was. Inside the 
folder were numerous military documents. Another folder 
contained Department of State documents. Some of them 
were letters from the U.S. embassy in Moscow giving confi- 
dential evaluations of the Russian situation and detailed ana- 
lytical impressions of Russian officials. Now they were being 
secretly shipped back for the Russians to read. 

When Major Jordan reported the facts to Washington he 
was severely criticized for holding up the plane! 

In April, 1943, the Russian liaison officer told Jordan that 
a very special shipment of experimental chemicals was com- 
ing through. The Russian officer called Harry Hopkins in 
Washington and then turned the phone over to Jordan. Major 
Jordan reports that Harry Hopkins told him: “I don’t want 
you to discuss this with anyone, and it is not to go on the 
records. Don’t make a big production of it, but just send it 
through quietly, in a hurry.” 

The Russian officer later told Jordan the shipment was 
“bomb powder” and Jordan saw an entry in the officer’s folder 
which said “Uranium.” The shipment came through June 10, 
1943. It was the first of several. At least 1,465 pounds of 
uranium salts are said to have been sent through to the Soviet 
Union. Metallurgists estimate that this could be reduced to 
6.25 pounds of fissionable U-235. This is two pounds more 
than would be necessary to produce an atomic explosion. 

On July 24, 1945, at Potsdam, President Truman an- 


The Naked Communist 


nounced to Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin that the 
United States had finally developed a highly secret bomb. He 
told them this bomb possessed almost unbelievable explosive 
power. Secretary of State James F. Byrnes was watching 
Stalin and noted that he did not seem particularly surprised, 
nor even interested in the announcement. Four years later 
(September 23, 1949), President Truman announced to the 
world that Russia had successfully exploded an atomic bomb — 
years ahead of U.S. expectations! Some officials wondered 
why, with all the help they received, the Russians had not 
exploded one long before. 


Closing Months of World War II 

Historically, Russia has always been stronger in defense 
than in attack. During World War II the Russian people 
displayed an incredible will to resist during the days when 
even Hitler thought they were completely beaten. They suf- 
fered astronomical losses: 7 million dead (including 2.5 
million Russian Jews exterminated by the Nazis and 1.5 million 
other Soviet civilians killed by the Germans), while approxi- 
mately 3 million died in combat. From 3 to 4 million were 
taken prisoners but the number of wounded and maimed is 
not given. As a result of the war there was a destruction of 
1,700 Russian towns, 70,000 villages and hamlets, 31,000 fac- 
tories, 84,000 schools, 40,000 miles of track, in addition to the 
destruction of 7 million horses, 17 million head of cattle, and 
20 million hogs. This represented about one-fourth of all 
Soviet property. 

There is no way of knowing whether or not Stalin ever 
forced himself to acknowledge it, but this almost incompre- 
hensible toll of monstrous destruction might very well have 
been avoided if Stalin had not made the insidious mistake of 
deliberately signing the pact with Hitler in 1939 which trig- 
gered the opening campaign of World War II. There are lead- 
ing political authorities who now state that if Hitler had been 


Communism and World War II 


forced to delay his campaign into Poland because of a threat 
from Russia, it would have given the Western Nations suf- 
ficient time to build up their forces, and by restoring a balance 
of power in Europe the entire saga of World War II might 
never have occurred. 

U.S. Policy of Coexistence Enters the Fourth Stage 

During World War II the President of the United States 
received two different interpretations of Communist policy 
and two different recommendations as how best to deal with 
the Communist leaders. One group of advisers took the his- 
torical approach, accepted the Communists as the world revo- 
lutionists which they described themselves to be, and assumed 
that their past conduct was the safest criterion of how they 
might be expected to act in the future. A second group of 
advisers presented a much more idealistic view of the Com- 
munist leaders. They wanted people to forget the past; to 
look upon Communist boorishness as nothing more than po- 
litical immaturity, something which could be changed by 
patient endurance and expansive generosity. 

To this second group, there rapidly gravitated not only 
theoretical idealists, but men and women who were later found 
to be deeply involved in outright subversion against the United 
States government. 3 Historians now find it difficult to define 
just where idealism left off and subversion took over. In any 
event this was the group which dominated the Lend-Lease 
program and set the stage for policies which controlled U.S. 
relations with Russia for approximately fifteen years. 

This was also the group of presidential advisers who ac- 
claimed with the greatest enthusiasm the slightest suggestion 
that the Communists were “changing.” For example, when 
the Communist International was disbanded May 22, 1943, 


3 A rather complete summary of Communist infiltration of the United 
States Government is contained in the book of James Burnham, 
“the web of subversion,” John Day Company, New York, 195 U. 


The Naked Communist 


this group hailed the announcement as incontrovertible evi- 
dence that the Communist leaders had renounced world con- 
quest. Others suspected that this was merely a propaganda 
device. The latter proved to be the case, as Igor Gouzenko, 
the former Russian code clerk, testified : “The announcement 
of the dissolution of the Comintern (Communist International) 
was probably the greatest farce of the Communists in recent 
years. Only the name was liquidated, with the object of re- 
assuring public opinion in the democratic countries. Actually 
the Comintern exists and continues its work, because the 
Soviet leaders have never relinquished the idea of establish- 
ing a Communist dictatorship.” 4 

When many high officials of the President’s own party 
saw the dangerous direction in which U.S. policy was moving, 
they hastened to warn him. One interesting conversation took 
place during the war between the President and his good 
friend, William C. Bullitt, whom the President had sent to 
Russia as the first U.S. ambassador in 1933. Mr. Bullitt had 
just finished outlining to the President many of his personal 
experiences with Joseph Stalin, and had warned the President 
to keep up his guard when dealing with the Communist leaders. 

“Bill,” replied the President, “I don’t dispute your facts ; 
they are accurate. I don’t dispute the logic of your reasoning. 
I just have a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. 
Harry (Hopkins) says he’s not, and that he doesn’t want any- 
thing but security for his country. And I think that if I give 
him everything that I can, and ask nothing from him in re- 
turn ... he won’t try to annex anything, and will work with 
me for a world peace and democracy.” 5 

The philosophy reflected in this statement is the keynote 
to an understanding of the conferences held by the “Big Three” 
toward the close of the war. By that time the diplomatic 
strategy of the United States (which began with simple co- 
existence in 1933) had passed into its fourth phase — the com- 


4 “THE REPORT OF THE ROYAL CANADIAN COMMISSION,” p. 663. 

5 life MAGAZINE, August 30, 1948, p. 94. 


Communism and World War II 


plete acceptance of the Russian Communists as full partners 
in the plans for preserving future world peace. 

Creation of the United Nations 

During August and September 1944, the representatives 
of Britain, China, Russia and the United States, met at 
Dumbarton Oaks in Washington, D. C. At this conference 
the constitutional foundation for the United Nations was laid. 
In it Russia was not only made a full partner, but a dominant 
stockholder. A most significant development was the fact 
that, while other nations objected, Russia insisted on the right 
to exercise the veto power even if she were a party to the 
dispute. This violated the very foundation of international 
jurisprudence but the democracies consented. They were 
ready to pay almost any price to get Russia to participate. 

By December 28, 1944, the American Ambassador to 
Russia began to express misgivings about U.S.-Soviet rela- 
tions and the part Russia would play in the post-war period : 
“The Soviets have definite objectives in their future foreign 
policy, all of which we do not as yet fully understand. . . . 
From Soviet actions so far, the terms ‘friendly’ and ‘inde- 
pendent’ appear to mean something quite different from our 
own interpretation.” 6 

Once the tide of war had turned, there was an increased 
arrogance in Soviet treatment of U.S. officials. General 
Deane wrote to Washington about Lend-Lease and said : “Even 
our giving is viewed with suspicion. . . . The party of the 
second part (the U. S.) is either a shrewd trader to be ad- 
mired or a sucker to be despised. ... I have yet to see the 
inside of a Russian home. Officials dare not become too friend- 
ly with us, and others are persecuted for this offense.” 7 

By the following April the Prime Minister of England 
was becoming fed up with the whole Russian picture. He 

«“U. S. NEWS AND WORLD report,” April 1, 1955, p. 41, in an article 

entitled: “U. S. Was Warned of Soviet Double Cross." 

7 “U. S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT,” April 1, 1955, p. 40. 


The Naked Communist 


appealed to President Roosevelt: “I deem it of the highest 
importance that a firm and blunt stand should be made at 
this juncture by our two countries in order that the air may 
be cleared and they (the Russians) realize that there is a 
point beyond which we will not tolerate insult.” 8 

There is some evidence that the President of the United 
States was also beginning to a,waken to the realities of the 
situation, but one week after this message was written, Presi- 
dent Roosevelt died. The monumental task of finishing the 
war and building the United Nations fell into the hands of 
those who still insisted that the Russians were being misunder- 
stood and that a successful partnership could be definitely 
achieved. 

On April 25, 1945, 1,400 representatives from 46 nations 
met in San Francisco, and after due deliberation agreed upon 
a United Nations Charter. 

Anyone familiar with the Communist Constitution of 
Russia will recognize in the United Nations Charter a similar 
format. It is characterized by a fervent declaration of demo- 
cratic principles which are sound and desirable; this is then 
followed by a constitutional restriction or procedural limita- 
tion which completely nullifies the principles just announced. 
For example, the Russian Constitution provides for uni- 
versal suffrage and voting by secret ballot. Then, in Article 126, 
it provides for a single political party (the Communist Party) 
which will furnish the voters with a single roster of candi- 
dates. This, of course renders completely meaningless all 
the high-flown phrases dealing with universal suffrage and 
secret ballots. Freedom of the press is likewise guaranteed, 
and then wiped out by the provision that all writings must 
be “in the interest of the workers.” 

In precisely this same way the United Nations Charter 
provides for “the sovereign equality of all its members” 
(Article 1) and then sets up a Security Council which is 
dominated by five permanent members (Britain, Russia, Chi- 
na, France and the United States) any one of which can nullify 

8 “U. s. news AND world report,” December 10, 1954, p. 29, in an 

article entitled: “Six Weeks That Shaped History.” 


Communism and World War II 


the expressed desires of all other member nations by the sim- 
ple device of exercising the veto power. 

The Charter allows each member nation to have one 
vote in the General Assembly. This sounds like democracy, 
but then it provides that the General Assembly can do noth- 
ing more than make recommendations, and must refer all of 
its suggestions to the Security Council for action! (Articles 
11-14). This makes the Security Council the only legally 
binding legislative body in the UN. To make this absolutely 
crystal clear the Charter provides in Article 24 that any nation 
which joins the UN must “agree to accept and carry out the 
decisions of the Security Council.” 

This means that in spite of the bold declaration that the 
UN is “based on respect for the principle of equal rights and 
self-determination of peoples” the cold fact is that the members 
are all committed to obey the will of a handful of nations in 
the Security Council. As the next ten years dramatically 
demonstrated, all members of the UN — particularly the 
little nations — could be subjected to the choke-hold which the 
U.S.S.R. had provided for herself by holding membership in the 
Security Council and dominating that body through the fre- 
quent use of the veto power. 

The Charter further provides that membership in the 
UN shall be restricted to “peace-loving” states (Article 4). 
This was thoroughly discussed at San Francisco, and Secre- 
tary John Foster Dulles has emphasized that the UN was de- 
signed to be a collective organization of friendly nations to 
preserve peace rather than an assemblage of all the nations in 
the world. In other words, the United Nations was built on the 
premise that its members would only include those nations 
which had had a demonstrated history of being “peace-loving.” 
Eight years after the adoption of the UN Charter, Secretary 
Dulles explained to the American Bar Association why the 
United Nations had failed to preserve the peace: “Now we see 
the inadequacy of an organization whose effective functioning 
depends upon cooperation with a nation which is dominated by 
an international party seeking world dominion.” 9 


9 “the U.N. today,” H. W. Wilson Company, New York, 1951,, p. 198. 


The Naked Communist 


As some authorities have since pointed out, the UN 
provided for a world-wide police commission and then made 
the top international gangster a member of that commission. 
It was like setting up a fire department to put out the con- 
flagration of war and then putting the world-community’s 
foremost firebug on the department. From the point of view 
of the little nations, it was like promising to provide a good 
shepherd to protect the small, weak countries, and then ap- 
pointing the wolf and all her pups to protect the flock. 

All this became apparent during the “decade of disillu- 
sionment” which immediately followed. In 1945, however, a 
war-weary, hopeful free world felt the United Nations was 
all it purported to be — an organization for collective security 
designed to stand like a bastion against aggressor nations. 


Communist Attitudes 
at the Close of World War II 

A clear indication of what the United States could expect 
from post-war Communism came on May 24, 1945, when the 
leading French Communist, Jacques Duclos, wrote a letter 
on behalf of his Russian superiors demanding that the Com- 
munists in the United States be required to immediately aban- 
don their policy of friendly collaboration with capitalism and 
return to their histpric mission of world revolution. Back in 
1940 the Communist Party of America had formally with- 
drawn from the Third International to avoid having to register 
as a foreign agent under the Voorhis Act. Later the Com- 
munist Party of America was dissolved in an attempt to 
attach the Communist membership to one of the major U.S. 
political parties. For this purpose they called themselves the 
Communist Political Association. 

All of this twisting and turning was in complete harmony 
with Soviet policy until 1945. After World War II, the an- 
nounced policy reverted to traditional Marxism. To justify 
the complete switch in policy, Earl Browder, the American 


Communism and World War II 


Communist leader, was accused of being personally responsible 
for the “errors” of the former policy. He was expelled from 
the party. 

The party leadership was immediately taken over by 
William Z. Foster. Foster, it will be recalled, had written an 
inflammatory book in 1932 called Toward Soviet America. 
Just before World War II he had testified before a Congres- 
sional Committee: “When a Communist heads a government 
of the United States, and that day will come just as surely as 
the sun rises, that government will not be a capitalistic govern- 
ment, but a Soviet government, and behind this government 
will stand the Red Army to enforce the dictatorship of the 
proletariat.” 10 

It is no longer difficult to understand why Moscow wanted 
men like Foster at the head of its Communist parties through- 
out the world. We now know that the Russian leaders ap- 
proached the conclusion of the world’s greatest war with the 
conviction that World War III might be in the near offing. In 
their secret circles they hopefully speculated that this next 
war might be Communism’s final death struggle with capital- 
ism. 

Igor Gouzenko states that after the armistice, he and the 
other employees in the Russian Embassy at Ottawa, Canada, 
were warned against an attitude of complacency. Colonel 
Zabotin gathered the employees together and then referred 
to the free-world democracies as follows: “Yesterday they 
were our allies, today they are our neighbors, tomorrow they 
will be our enemies l” 11 

Remarkable insight into the Communist mind during this 
period can also be obtained from a speech delivered to an 
intimate circle of Communist leaders by Marshal Tito, head 
of the party in Yugoslavia: 

“The second capitalist war, in which Russia was attacked 
by her most dangerous and strongest fascist enemy, has ended 


10 See the Report of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities 
January 3, 1939, pp. 18-21. 

11 Report of the Royal Commission of Canada, p. 655. 


The Naked Communist 


176 


in a decisive victory for the Soviet Union. But this does not 
mean that Marxism has won a final victory over capitalism. . . . 
Our collaboration with capitalism during the war which has 
recently ended, by no means signifies that we shall prolong 
our alliance with it in the future. On the contrary, the capi- 
talist forces constitute our natural enemy despite the fact that 
they helped us to defeat their most dangerous representative. 
It may happen that we shall again decide to make use of their 
aid, but always with the sole aim of accelerating their final 
ruin. . . . 

“The atomic bomb is a new factor by means of which 
the capitalist forces wish to destroy the Soviet Union and the 
victorious prospects of the working class. It is their only 
remaining hope. . . . Our aims have not been realized in the 
desired form because the construction of the Atomic bomb 
was speeded up and perfected as early as 1945. But we are 
not far from the realization of our aims. We must gain a 
little more time for the reorganization of our ranks and the 
perfecting of our preparations in arms and munitions. 

“Our present policy should, therefore, be to follow a 
moderate line, in order to gain time for the economic and in- 
dustrial reconstruction of the Soviet Union and of the other 
states under our control. Then the moment will come when 
we can hurl ourselves into the battle for the final annihilation 
of reaction.” 12 

Such were the reflections of Communist leaders as they 
emerged from World War II as the second greatest political 
power on earth. They felt Communism might have unprece- 
dented possibilities as the “brave new world” entered the post- 
war period. 

12 Report by the Continental News Service, November 8, 191,6, and 

quoted in “the communist threat to Canada,” Ottawa, 191,7, 

pp. 10-11. 



IX 

Communist Attacks on the Free World 
During the Post-War Period 

Stalin’s plan for the expansion of Communism after the war 
involved three techniques: the creation of pro-Communist 
puppet governments in occupied territory, the military con- 
quest of new territory by satellite armies, the further in- 
filtration of free countries by Soviet espionage and propa- 
ganda organizations. In this chapter we shall try to account 
for the phenomenal success of these three programs. It should 
provide the answers to these questions: 

Toward the last part of World War II did Allied leaders 
begin to suspect a Russian double cross? Why did Harry 
Hopkins make a special trip to Moscow a few months before 
he died? 

How did the free world lose 100,000,000 people to the 
Iron Curtain through Soviet strategy? 

How did the free world lose 450,000,000 more people 
through the conquest of China? What did the Wedemeyer 
Report reveal? 

Do you think diplomatic blunders may have encouraged 


The Naked Communist 


the attack on South Korea? What significance do you attach 
to Owen Lattimore’s amazing statement in 1949 : “The thing 
to do is let South Korea fall, but not to let it look as if we 
pushed her”? 

What was the turning point in the Korean war which gave 
the UN forces their first military advantage? 

After the Korean cease-fire in 1953, what did the U.S. 
Secretary of State say to indicate that the U.S. was abandon- 
ing a twenty-year policy of appeasement? 

What was the role of the FBI in the “Battle of the Under- 
ground?” 

Why did the U.S. not do more to prevent the loss of 
French Indo-China? 

In the dispute over Formosa, why did the Red Chinese 
call the U.S. a paper tiger? 

What did Dimitry Z. Manuilsky say about the strategy of 
“peaceful coexistence”? 


The Decay in U.S. — Soviet Relations 
at the End of World War 11 

The evidence of Communist subversion and aggression 
became so apparent toward the close of World War II that 
even some of those who had staked their professional careers 
on the friendship of the Soviet leaders began to sense a feel- 
ing of alarm. This included Harry Hopkins. Within a month 
after the death of President Roosevelt, Hopkins became so 
concerned with developments that he hurriedly made arrange- 
ments to see Stalin in person. At the time Hopkins was 
critically ill, with only a short time to live, but he forced 
himself to make this final pilgrimage to Moscow to try and 
salvage some of the remnants from the wreckage of what was 
to have been a master plan for post-war peace. 

When he arrived in Moscow, however, Hopkins was con- 
fronted by a blunt and angry Stalin. We are indebted to 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


former Secretary of State, James F. Byrnes, for an account 
of what happened. 1 Stalin made an amazingly antagonistic 
verbal assault on the handling of the program Hopkins had 
sponsored for Russia — the program of Lend-Lease. The shock 
of this attack may be better appreciated when it is remem- 
bered that Hopkins considered himself to be the best friend 
the Soviets had in America. He and his associates had just 
spent billions of dollars and risked an atomic war to try and 
create a Russo-American partnership for peace. Probably 
Hopkins would not have been more startled by the treatment 
he received if Stalin had physically slapped him in the face. 
In reply, Hopkins vigorously pointed out “how liberally the 
United States (through him) had construed the law in send- 
ing foodstuffs and other non-military items to their aid.” 
Stalin admitted all of this but roughly crossed it off by saying 
the Soviets still could not forgive the United States for ter- 
minating Lend-Lease after V-Day in Europe. 

At the moment it seemed that nothing would pacify Stalin 
but a brand new round of wide-open American Lend-Lease 
generosity ; otherwise he apparently could think of no partic- 
ular reason for even pretending to want the friendship of the 
United States any longer. He even threatened to boycott the 
United Nations Conference which was soon to be held in San 
Francisco. 

For reasons which now seem quite incongruous, Hopkins 
continued to plead with Stalin to stay on the team and reiter- 
ated the many concessions which he was sure the Communists 
could gain by taking part in the United Nations organization. 
Like a pouting and spunky child, Stalin assumed an air of 
studied reluctance, but gradually gave in. By agreeing to 
join the United Nations Conference at San Francisco he 
wanted Hopkins to know he was doing the United States a 
tremendous favor. 

Finally, Hopkins returned home. By the time of his 
death in January, 1946, there was already ample evidence 


1 Byrnes, James F., “speaking frankly,” Harpers, New York, 191,7. 


The Naked Communist 


that peace-loving nations were in for a violent and stormy era 
as a result of the strategy of writing in the Soviets as full- 
fledged partners of the free world. 

The Free World Loses 100 Million People 

Obviously, a primary object of World War II was to 
liberate all of the countries occupied by the Axis powers. 
Russia was well aware that if she were to expand her influence 
into these liberated nations — particularly the ones which 
bordered the U.S.S.R. — she would have to do it in such a way 
as to create the illusion that these nations had gone Com- 
munistic through their own political self-determination. It 
became established Soviet policy to take secret but highly 
active interest in the affairs of these countries — to make them 
“voluntary” satellites through infiltration and subversion. 

In some nations this plan brought immediate results. For 
example, it made satellites of Yugoslavia and Albania almost 
overnight because the Communists had captured the leader- 
ship of the anti-Nazi, anti-Fascist resistance movements dur- 
ing the war and as soon as these countries were liberated the 
Communists demanded the right to set up the new govern- 
ments. Later, Stalin tried to purge Tito’s regime but found 
it would not purge. Tito temporarily pulled Yugoslavia away 
from the Russian orbit but remained openly devoted to Marx- 
ism in spite of generous U.S. economic aid. 

Russia also found a highly favorable condition for her 
schemes in the Eastern European countries. As a result 
of the military campaigns carried out by Soviet troops during 
the final phase of World War II, Red forces occupied all of 
Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and 
most of what is now East Germany. The Soviet strategy for 
the “peaceful” conquest of these countries prior to withdraw- 
ing the Red troops was to encourage the creation of coalition 
governments including only left-wing parties. This gave the 
impression that these nations had some semblance of repre- 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


sentative government. The next step was to maneuver Com- 
munists into all key governmental positions. The third and 
final step was to force all parties to join in a “monolithic 
bloc” with the Communist leaders assuming complete dicta- 
torial power. 

Through this carefully executed maneuver the complete 
subjugation of all these countries was completed by 1949. 
The Communist Iron Curtain came clanking down on all their 
western borders and the free world found itself completely 
cut off from any contact with these former allies who repre- 
sented approximately 100 million people. 


The Free World Loses China with Her 
1*50 Million People 


At this same time there also came to the free world powers 
one of the most bitter lessons they had to learn in dealing 
with World Communism — the loss of China. 

After fighting the Japanese militarists for fourteen years, 
China had approached the end of World War II with high 
hopes. The war had been fought under a dictatorship led by 
Chiang Kai-shek but his Nationalist Government had prom- 
ised to set up a democratic constitution as soon as national 
unity would permit. As the war ended Chiang Kai-shek or- 
dered the restoration of civil rights and inaugurated free- 
dom of the press. 

The Chinese leaders knew their greatest threat to peace 
was the small but well-trained army of Chinese Communists in 
the northwest; nevertheless, they went right ahead with their 
plans for a constitution which would allow the Communists 
full representation but would require them to disband their 
armed forces. There was confidence that a representative 
government could be worked out for all parties in China if 
armed insurrection were eliminated. In fact, Chiang Kai- 
shek invited the Communist leader, Mao Tse-tung, to come to 
the capital and see if they could reach a peaceful settlement 


The Naked Communist 


of their difference. Mao came. He promised to cooperate in 
setting up a democracy but Chiang Kai-shek and his aides were 
not at all impressed with his superficial display of professed 
sincerity. Chiang later promised his nervous associates that 
he would never relinquish his dictatorial powers until he was 
completely satisfied that the government was safely in the 
hands of a substantial majority of the people — not just some 
noisy militant minority. 


Effect of the Yalta Agreement on Post-War China 


An early blow to China’s hopes for a post-war peace came 
when it was learned that back in February, 1945, British 
and American diplomatic leaders at Yalta had agreed to give 
Russia extensive property rights in Manchuria if the Soviets 
would join in the war against Japan. Chiang Kai-shek was out- 
raged by this unilateral arrangement (China was never con- 
sulted) and he never ceased to blame much of the subsequent 
disaster on this initial blunder. 

The Yalta agreement allowed Russia to come racing into 
Manchuria (and North Korea) just six days before the 
Japanese capitulated. After a typically brutal Russian oc- 
cupation, the Soviet troops fixed the Communist grip on this 
territory which the Japanese had extensively industrialized 
and which was one of the richest agricultural regions in all 
China. In fact, it was Manchuria that the Nationalists were 
expecting to use as the working base in bolstering China’s 
battered economy. 

However, after taking Manchuria, Stalin suddenly and 
unexpectedly agreed to withdraw his troops and recognize the 
Nationalist Government of China as the legal sovereign of 
that territory providing China would acknowledge Russia’s 
property rights in Manchuria which Stalin had previously 
demanded at Yalta. This consisted of half ownership in the 
Manchurian railroads and the right to lease Port Arthur as a 
Russian naval base. Under strong pressure from the United 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


States and Great Britain, China signed this agreement with 
Russia on August 14, 1945. 

Almost immediately Chiang Kai-shek knew this was a 
serious mistake. The treaty was nothing but a Russian tool 
of strategy which legally codified the mistakes at Yalta. As 
Chiang Kai-shek had feared, the Russians operated the Man- 
churian railroads as though they owned them outright. They 
not only set up a naval base at Port Arthur, but arrogantly re- 
fused to allow the Chinese to use their own port of Dairen. 
Instead of evacuating Manchuria, the Soviets began looting 
the entire region of all its heavy industry and shipping it to 
Russia as “war booty.” This represented a stunning blow to 
China’s future economic recovery. 

But even more important than this was the Russians’ 
strategy of delaying the removal of their troops by various 
pretexts until the Chinese Communists could come in from the 
northwest and occupy Manchuria. As the Communists came 
in, the Russians turned over to them the vast quantities of 
ammunition and war materiel which they had seized from the 
Japanese. 

Consequently, when the Nationalists arrived to take over 
Manchuria, they were outraged to find that the Chinese Com- 
munists were already dug in. Immediately civil war loomed 
up as an inescapable consequence. 


Chiang Kai-shek Attempts to Create 
A Democracy in China 

All of this was happening right at the time the Nation- 
alists were trying to prepare China for a constitutional form 
of government. On his own initiative Chiang had set May 
5, 1946, as the first meeting of the Chinese National Assembly 
in which all parties were to take part. But, of course, this en- 
tire program to unify and democratize China was seriously 
jeopardized by the outbreak of war in Manchuria. 

At this point the U.S. diplomats decided to take a hand. 


The Naked Communist 


184 They had planned the United Nations to preserve world peace 
and had insisted from the beginning that the Red leaders were 
potentially peaceful and had no territorial ambitions. Assum- 
ing this to be true they denounced Chiang for resisting the 
Chinese Reds. They accused him of creating new world ten- 
sions. General George C. Marshall was therefore sent over 
to China to stop the civil war. 

General Marshall arrived in January, 1946. What hap- 
pened after that is a long series of incidents, each one tragical- 
ly demonstrating the error of trying to incorporate the ideas 
of world revolutionists within the framework of representative 
government. The Communists demanded a coalition govern- 
ment but insisted on keeping their own private army. They 
wanted a voice in the government of all China, but would not 
allow the central government to have a voice in the affairs of 
Communist-occupied areas of China. They agreed to a cease- 
fire and then launched aggressive attacks as soon as it served 
their own advantage to do so. They agreed to help set up a 
State Council representing all parties and then advised at the 
last moment that they would not participate. When the date 
for the first National Assembly was postponed so the Com- 
munists could participate, they used it as an excuse to accuse 
Chiang Kai-shek of setting the new date without proper 
authorization. After a second postponement, with the Com- 
munists still refusing to participate, the National Assembly 
finally convened on November 15, 1946, and a democratic 
constitution was approved and adopted on Christmas Day. 
But the Communists would have no part of it. 

Chiang Kai-shek became completely convinced that the 
Communists would never negotiate a peaceful settlement but 
were out to win the whole domain of China by military con- 
quest. He also believed the Communists could never represent 
the interests of China because their policies were created and 
imposed upon them by Moscow. 

Time was to prove this analysis correct, but U.S. diplo- 
matic strategists were the last to be convinced — and then only 
after the Chinese mainland had been lost. Furthermore, 
Chiang could not convince the U.S. diplomatic corps that he 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


was justified in striking back when the Communists attacked 
him. When he tried to regain the territory recently seized by 
the Communists, it was described in Washington as “inexcus- 
able aggression.” 


Disaster Strikes Down an Old U.S. Ally 

Finally, in the summer of 1946, when the Communists had 
repeatedly violated the truce agreement, the Nationalists de- 
cided to vigorously counterattack and penetrate deep into 
Manchuria. The diplomats frantically ordered Chiang to 
stop, but he refused to do so. He said another truce would 
only allow the Communists time to re-group and come back 
even more fiercely than before. He also said it was his inten- 
tion to continue the campaign to forcibly disarm the Commu- 
nists and restore them to civilian status so that China could 
get on with her program of constitutional government with- 
out fear of constant insurrection. 

This line of reasoning did not appeal to the State Depart- 
ment. Three different times Chiang was ordered to issue an 
unconditional cease-fire. To make it stick a U.S. embargo 
was finally placed on all aid to China. Only after United States 
aid abruptly halted did Chiang reluctantly agree to a cease-fire. 
General Marshall stated: “As Chief of Staff I armed 39 anti- 
Communist divisions (in China), now with a stroke of the pen 
I disarm them.” 

This proved a great boon to the Communists. While the 
Nationalists were being held down by U.S. diplomatic pres- 
sure, the Communists re-grouped their forces and prepared 
for the all-out campaign which later proved fatal to China. 
It is strange that even after Chiang had surrendered his own 
best judgment and issued a cease-fire, the U.S. embargo was 
not lifted. The Nationalist forces sat idly by, consuming many 
of their supplies which they feared would never be replaced. 
Later, when the Red tide had begun to roll in on Chiang, Con- 
gress did finally force through an “Aid to China” bill, but ac- 


The Naked Communist 


tual delivery of goods was not processed in time to be of any 
significant assistance. 

From 1947 on, the morale of the Nationalist army disinte- 
grated. It seemed apparent to Chinese military leaders that 
they were the victims of Communist aggression on the one 
hand and the victims of a total lack of insight by U.S. and 
British diplomats on the other. 

After Chiang issued his unconditional cease-fire, General 
Marshall appealed to the Communist leaders to reopen negoti- 
ations for settlement. The Communists replied, but talked as 
though they were victors and made demands which even Gen- 
eral Marshall labeled as completely unreasonable. They wanted 
all the rich areas of Manchuria from which they had just been 
driven. They wanted the National Assembly dissolved and 
demanded a predominant place in the proposed coalition gov- 
ernment. It was obvious that any hope of settlement under 
such circumstances was impossible. General Marshall accepted 
this as a Communist pronouncement that the Communists 
were no longer interested in mediation and he therefore ended 
his mission by having President Truman call him home. He 
returned to America in January, 1947, and immediately be- 
came the new U.S. Secretary of State. 


The Wedemeyer Report 


There were many leaders in the United States Govern- 
ment who were completely dissatisfied with the way the Chi- 
nese Civil War had been handled. Therefore, in the summer of 
1947, General Albert C. Wedemeyer was sent to Asia under 
Presidential orders to find out what was wrong in China. 
Upon his return he submitted a report which was extremely 
critical of the entire formula for peace which had been 
followed by General Marshall and the diplomatic corps. He in- 
dicated that not only had the interests of free China been vio- 
lated, but the self-interests of the United States and all her 
Allies had been subordinated to the whims of the Commu- 


Posf-War Communist Attacks 


nists. He recommended prompt and voluminous aid to the 
Nationalist Government and predicted that the situation 
could still be salvaged if help were provided in time. 

Unfortunately, this report fell into the hands of the very 
people whom General Wedemeyer had criticized. Conse- 
quently, it was buried in department files for nearly two years 
and was not brought to light until long after it was too late 
to take the action it recommended. 

Meanwhile, the forces of collapse were rapidly moving to- 
ward their inexorable climax. During 1947 and the early part 
of 1948 the armies of Chiang Kai-shek held up remarkably 
well, but toward the latter part of 1948, the lack of supplies 
and the internal disintegration of the Chinese economy took 
its toll. The fall of the Nationalist forces was not gradual — 
it was sudden and complete. Many thousands abandoned their 
positions and raced southward in disorganized confusion but 
other thousands threw down their arms and surrendered to 
the Chinese Communists on the spot. 

By September, 1949, the Communist leaders were al- 
ready wildly celebrating their victory as they set up the 
“People’s Republic of China.” Shortly afterwards Chiang 
acknowledged he was temporarily beaten and abandoned the 
entire mainland of China in order to flee with the straggling 
remnants of his army to Formosa. 

The State Department White Paper of 191+9 


The fall of free China produced a wave of boiling indigna- 
tion throughout the United States. Both political leaders and 
lay citizens felt that somehow an old ally had been subverted 
or betrayed. At the time few Americans were really aware 
of what was involved in the Chinese debacle, but they knew 
Chiang Kai-shek and America’s interests had suffered a cata- 
strophic defeat. There was widespread demand for the facts. 

The men who had engineered the fatal Chinese policy 


The Naked Communist 


quickly collaborated on a report designed to justify their 
handling of America’s interests in the Far East. It was 
called “United States Relations With China” and was pub- 
lished as a White Paper” in 1949. To many people the argu- 
ments in this paper were highly persuasive, but not to all ; in 
fact, the loss of China brought a startling awakening to some 
of those who had been with General Marshall and had trusted 
the Communists almost to the very last. One of these was 
America’s ambassador to China during that critical period, 
Dr. John Leighton Stuart. 2 As a former missionary to China 
and president of Yenching University, he could not help 
but evaluate the fall of China as a vast human disaster. He 
criticized himself for having a part in it and censured his col- 
leagues for trying to cover up their mistakes in the White 
Paper. Dr. Stuart frankly declared: “We Americans (who 
were carrying out the China policy) mainly saw the good 
things about the Chinese Communists, while not noticing care- 
fully the intolerance, bigotry, deception, disregard for human 
life, and other evils which seem to be inherent in any totali- 
tarian system. We kept Communist meanings for such adjec- 
tives as progressive, democratic, liberal, also bourgeois, 
reactionary, imperialist, as they intended we should do. We 
failed to realize fully the achievements to date and the potenti- 
alities of Chinese democracy. Therefore, we cannot escape a 
part of the responsibility of the great catastrophe — not only 
for China, but also for America and the free world — the loss 
of the Chinese mainland.” 

Concerning the White Paper he said: “I was, in fact, 
merely one of many persons who were perplexed and filled 
with apprehension by what they found in this extraordinary 
book. ... It is clear that the purpose was not to produce a 
‘historian’s history’ but to select materials which had been 
used in making the policy in effect at the moment. What had 


2 For a rather full report by thin official who saw the fall of China 
see “FIFTY YEARS IN china,” by John Leighton Stuart, Random 
House, N. Y., 1955. 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


been omitted were materials rejected in the making of policy, 
materials which had not been relied upon.” 

This had been General Wedemeyer’s complaint. The dip- 
lomatic strategists were not willing to recognize the realities 
of the situation nor reverse their evaluation of Communist 
leaders even though the evidence of duplicity was everywhere. 

An Amazing Development 

By 1949 there was little excuse for any alert American to 
be further deceived by Communist strategy. Dozens of Ameri- 
can-Communist spies had been exposed, the leading American 
Communists had been arrested by the FBI and convicted of 
conspiring to overthrow the U.S. Government by violence, 
Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley and a swarm of ex- 
Communist agents had laid bare their souls, the Western 
Allies had gone through the vicious squeeze play of the Berlin 
blockade and the United States had spent billions in foreign 
aid to keep Russia from consuming all of Europe the same 
way she had taken over China. But in spite of all this, a meet- 
ing was sponsored by the State Department in October, 1949, 
which almost defies explanation. 

It was held for the announced purpose of deciding what 
the “experts” believed should be done in the Far East. The 
meeting was presided over by Philip Jessup of the State De- 
partment, and those in attendance included not only State 
Department officials, but many select guests who were inter- 
ested in Asia. Dr. John Leighton Stuart was present and 
afterwards expressed deep apprehension concerning the slant 
of the entire discussion. Harold Stassen was also present and 
later testified that the majority present favored the following 
policies : 

1. European aid should be given priority over Asia. 

2. Aid to Asia should not be started until after a “long 
and careful study.” 

3. Russian Communists should be considered “not as 


The Naked Communist 


aggressive as Hitler” and “not as apt to take direct 
military action to expand their empire.” 

4. Communist China should he recognized by the U. S. 

5. Britain and India should be urged to follow suit in 
recognizing the Chinese Communists. 

6. The Chinese Communists should be allowed to take 
over Formosa. 

7. The Communists should be allowed to take over Hong 
Kong from Britain if the Communists insisted. 

8. Nehru should not be given aid because of his “reac- 
tionary and arbitrary tendencies.” 

9. The Nationalist blockade of China should be broken 
and economic aid sent to the Communist mainland. 

10. No aid should be sent to Chiang or to the anti-Commu- 
nist guerillas in South China. 

Two of the men at the conference who were foremost in 
promoting these policies were Owen Lattimore and Lawrence 
Rosinger. Both were eventually identified by Louis Budenz 
(former editor of the Daily Worker testifying under oath) as 
members of the Communist Party.* 

Even if there had been no such identification, the glar- 
ing truth which every man at the conference should have 
known was the fact that this entire list of policies was a car- 
bon copy of the prevailing “party line” coming out of Mos- 
cow. For months these very policies had been hammered out 
in every edition of the Communist press. It was a singular 
commentary on the judgment and professional discernment of 
those officials who fell in with these fantastic recommendations 
— particularly in the light of the provocative and inflammatory 
policies which Russia was using at that very moment to 
threaten nations in nearly every region of the free world. 

Three months after this conference, the new Secretary of 
State, Dean Acheson, announced several policies portending 
the loss of Formosa and the liquidation of the Chinese Nation- 

* See “REPORT OF THE MCCARREN COMMITTEE TO THE SENATE,” p. 101,9 

and. also “report of the hearings on Philip jessup’s nomi- 
nation,” pp. 711,-721. For Budenz’s testimony, see “report of the 

MCCARREN COMMITTEE TO THE SENATE,” p. 11,8. 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


alists by the Communists. First, he overruled the recom- 
mendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (to give strong military 
aid to Chiang) by announcing on January 12, 1950, that the 
principles itemized above as point No. 6 and point No. 10 were 
to be official U.S. policy. He also stated that the U.S. defense 
perimeter in the Pacific did not include either Formosa or 
South Korea. He stated that if an attack should occur outside 
the U.S. defense perimeter “the initial reliance must be on the 
people attacked to resist it.” Then he suggested that they could 
appeal to the United Nations. This was simply a blunt state- 
ment that the U.S. diplomats were abandoning Formosa and 
Korea. This announcement was shocking to many students of 
the Far East, not only because the policy violated U.S. self- 
interest, but because it literally invited Communist attack on 
these free-world allies by giving advance notice that these 
areas could be invaded without interference from the United 
States. 

It took just six months for the Communists to select and 
prepare their point of attack. They chose the practically de- 
fenseless territory of South Korea as the first theater of war. 

The Communist Attack on South Korea 

It will be recalled that the Yalta agreement allowed Rus- 
sia to take over North Korea at the same time the Soviets 
occupied Manchuria. As elsewhere, the Russians did not with- 
draw their troops until a strong Communist puppet govern- 
ment was firmly entrenched. As for South Korea, U.S. forces 
occupied the territory up to the 38th parallel. 

During 1949 a United Nations mandate required both 
Russia and the U.S. to withdraw their troops. The Russians 
left behind them a powerful North Korean Red Army con- 
sisting of 187,000 well-trained and well-equipped troops, 173 
Russian tanks, quantities of Russian-built artillery and 200 
Russian planes. On the other hand, South Korea was a new- 
born Republic with an army of 96,000 men who were poorly 
equipped, with practically no tanks, anti-tank weapons, heavy 


The Naked Communist 


artillery or fighter planes. This meant that by the end of 
1949 South Korea was even more vulnerable to attack from 
North Korea than Formosa was from Communist China. And 
the Washington diplomats had assured both Formosa and 
Korea that in case of attack they definitely could not expect 
any military help from the United States. As spokesman for 
the diplomatic left-wing contingent, Owen Lattimore explained 
the situation: “The thing to do is let South Korea fall, but 
not to let it look as if we pushed it !” 3 

In the early dawn of Sunday, June 25, 1950, 8 divisions 
of the North Korean Red Army spilled across the 38th par- 
allel and plunged southward toward the city of Seoul. Frantic 
calls went out from President Sigmund Rhee to the Security 
Council of the United Nations, to President Truman in Wash- 
ington and to General Douglas MacArthur in Japan. All 
three responded. The Security Council pronounced North 
Korea guilty of a breach of the peace and ordered her troops 
back to the 38th parallel. (If Russia had been represented, she 
no doubt would have vetoed this action, but the Soviet dele- 
gates were boycotting the Security Council because China con- 
tinued to be represented by the Nationalists rather than by the 
Chinese Communists.) General MacArthur responded by 
flying to Korea and reporting the desperate situation to Wash- 
ington. President Truman responded by completely reversing 
the policy of his diplomatic advisers and ordering General 
MacArthur to pour U.S. ground troops in from Japan to stop 
the red tide. Thus the war began. 

For several weeks the situation looked very black. Gen- 
eral MacArthur was made supreme commander of all United 
Nations forces, but at first these were so limited that the shal- 
low beachhead at Pusan was about all they could hold. Then 
General MacArthur formulated a desperate plan. It was so 
difficult a(nd illogical that he felt certain it would come to the 
Communists as a complete surprise. It did. On September 15, 
half way up the Korean Peninsula, the U.S. Navy (with two 


3 A full article on this theme appeared in the New York “daily 
compass,’’ under date of July 17, 1949. 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


British carriers), the Air Force, Army and Marine Corps 
combined to launch an ingenious invasion at Inchon — a point 
where the 29-foot tide made a landing seem fantastic. Split- 
second timing permitted landings and the next thing the North 
Koreans knew they were trapped in the jaws of a mighty mili- 
tary pincer movement which cut across their supply lines and 
then rapidly closed in to wipe out the flower of the whole 
North Korean Army which, of course, was concentrated in the 
South. It was a magnificent victory. 

MacArthur then turned his armies toward the north. The 
ROK’s (South Koreans) went up the East Coast while other 
UN troops went up the West Coast. In doing this, General 
MacArthur was required to act on obscure hints rather than 
specific directions from Washington and the UN. For a while 
it appeared that he might be forbidden to pursue the enemy 
forces retreating to the North. 

By the middle of October the coastal spearheads of the 
UN offensive were nearing the northernmost parts of Korea 
and the war appeared practically over. There was the immedi- 
ate prospect of unifying the entire Korean Peninsula and 
setting up a democratic republic. Then, in November, unex- 
pectedly disaster struck. 

From across the northern Korean boundary of the Yalu 
River came the first flood tide of what turned out to be a Chi- 
nese Communist army of one million men. As these troops 
came pouring into North Korea, the UN forces found them- 
selves smothered by a great wave of fanatical, screaming, 
suicidal humanity. MacArthur radioed to Washington: “We 
face an entirely new war!” 

The UN lines were cut to ribbons as their wall of defense 
was pushed back below the 38th parallel. General Mac- 
Arthur could scarcely believe that the Chinese Communists 
would dare to risk the massive retaliation of the United States 
atomic bombing Air Force by this inexcusable assault on UN 
forces. However, what he did not know, but soon discovered, 
was the appalling fact that the Chinese had already been as- 
sured by their intelligence agents that the diplomats in Wash- 
ington, London and New York were not going to allow Mac- 


The Naked Communist 


194 Arthur to retaliate with the U.S. Air Force. MacArthur was 
going to be restricted to “limited” warfare. 

It was in this hour that General MacArthur found that 
pro-Communist forces in the UN and left-wing sympathizers 
in the State Department were swamping the policies of the 
White House, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and those who had 
charge of the Korean War. He found that vast supplies which 
he badly needed were being diverted to Europe in accordance 
with point No. 1 of the State Department Conference. He was 
specifically restricted from following Chinese jets to their 
bases or bombing the Manchurian Railroad which was dump- 
ing mountains of supplies on the north banks of the Yalu Riv- 
er. He was forbidden to bomb the Yalu bridge over which 
troops and supplies were funneled, and his own supplies and 
replacements were cut back to the point where a counter-offen- 
sive became strategically difficult, if not impossible. The final 
blow came when the diplomats flatly turned down Chiang Kai- 
shek’s enthusiastic offer to send thousands of trained Nation- 
alist troops from Formosa to fight in Korea. 

Over a period of four months General MacArthur 
watched the slaughter resulting from these stalemate policies. 
Finally, he could contain himself no longer. He violated a 
presidential gag order dated December 6, 1950, and answered 
a written inquiry from Congressman Joseph W. Martin con- 
cerning the inexplicable reverses which UN forces were suf- 
fering in Korea. The General’s letter giving recommenda- 
tions for the winning of the war was read in Congress April 
5, 1951, and five days later, President Truman ordered Mac- 
Arthur summarily withdrawn from all commands. 

General MacArthur was relieved by General Matthew B. 
Ridgeway and he returned to the United States completely per- 
plexed by the sudden termination of his military career. It 
was not until he landed in San Francisco and met the first 
wave of shouting, cheering, admiring fellow citizens that he 
realized that the sickness in the American body politic was 
not in all its members but only in one corner of its head. 

It will be recalled that two more years of military stagna- 
tion followed the recall of General MacArthur. Subsequently, 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


hearings before Congressional committees permitted General 
Mark Clark, General George E. Stratemeyer, General James 
A. Van Fleet, Admiral Charles Joy and others to explain what 
happened to their commands in Korea. Each one verified the 
fact that the military was never permitted to fight a winning 
war. The diplomats had imposed upon them a theory called 
“Communist Containment,” which in actual operation resulted 
in the containment of the UN fighting forces instead of the 
Communists. It soon became apparent that the Korean War 
had been run by the same team and according to the same 
policies as those which resulted in the fall of China. 

It was also to be revealed at a later date that not only had 
the machinations of confused diplomats contributed to the 
semi-defeat in Korea but that fulltime under-cover agents of 
Soviet Russia had often stood at the elbows of officials in Lon- 
don, Washington and at the UN in New York to argue the 
Moscow line. Among the high-level spies for Russia during 
this critical period were two top British diplomats, Donald 
MacLean and Guy Burgess. MacLean was head of the Ameri- 
can desk in Britain’s diplomatic headquarters at London, 
Burgess was the second secretary of the British Embassy in 
Washington. Both fled behind the Iron Curtain when they 
were about to be arrested by British Intelligence. 


The Korean Armistice 

By the time President Eisenhower took office in Janu- 
ary, 1953, there was a general feeling of gloom and despair 
concerning Korea. The people desperately desired to somehow 
stop the bloodshed. The hopes for peace were suddenly accel- 
erated by a news flash of March 5 which swept round the 
world. Joseph Stalin was dead! 

The next day a new government took over in Russia and 
the leader turned out to be Stalin’s former secretary and the 
keeper of the secret Communist files — Georgi Malenkov. He 
had seized power by joining forces with Lavrenti P. Beria, 


The Naked Communist 


head of the secret police who had an army of agents and troops 
numbering two million. Beria also had charge of the forced 
labor camps and supervised the atomic energy plants. 

However, when Malenkov and Beria took over as heirs of 
Stalin they immediately found themselves confronted by an 
explosive economic crisis. Pressure was building up inside Rus- 
sia (and her satellites) just as it did in 1922 and again in 
1932. Malenkov therefore offered respite to his people : “Let 
us now lay heavy industry aside for awhile. The people can- 
not eat heavy industry. ... We should care for the needs of 
our people.” This was the beginning of a radical new policy 
for the U.S.S.R. At home the slogan was “More Food”; 
abroad Malenkov’s slogan was a campaign for “Peaceful Co- 
existence” with all the democracies. 

It was just twenty-three days after Stalin died that the 
Communist Chinese acted on their new signals and opened 
negotiations with the UN commanders for an armistice. 
This finally led to the signing of a truce on July 27, 1953. It 
became effective twelve days later. 

Thus ended the Korean War. It had cost the United 
States 20 billion dollars and more than 135,000 casualties. It 
had cost South Korea 1 million dead, another million maimed 
and wounded, 9 million left homeless and saddled South Korea 
with 4 million refugees from North Korea. 

The U.S. Summarily Abandons Its Twenty -Year 
Policy of Appeasement 

The people of the United States came out of the Korean 
War sadder and wiser than when they went in. Authorities 
have stated that two things happened in the Korean War 
which may yet brand it as the greatest blunder the Commu- 
nist strategists ever made. First, it awakened the United 
States to the necessity of vigorously rearming and staying 
armed so long as the Communist threat exists. Second, it 
demonstrated to the people of the United States the inherent 
weaknesses of the United Nations. As Senator Robert A. Taft 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


summed it up: “The United Nations serves a very useful 
purpose as a town meeting of the world . . . but it is an impos- 
sible weapon against forcible aggression.” 

Back in 1950 when the UN called upon all its members 
to furnish the means to resist the Communists, only 16 coun- 
tries responded with the highly essential ingredient of armed 
troops. Altogether, these 16 nations furnished an army of 
35,000 fighting men. Little South Korea maintained a fight- 
ing force of 400,000 men while the United States made up the 
difference by furnishing a force of 350,000. More than one mil- 
lion American GI’s had to be rotated through Korea to main- 
tain the U.S. quota of military strength. In the mind of the 
average American the UN had therefore ceased to repre- 
sent “collective security.” It was difficult to forget that while 
Americans and South Koreans were taking the brunt of the 
war, Russia and Britain had both violated the UN embargo 
by shipping strategic materials to Red China. On the floor 
of the UN, Andrei Vishinsky had thrown down the Russian 
challenge: “The Soviet Union has never concealed the fact 
that it sold and continues to sell armaments to its ally, China!” 

The end of the Korean War marked the end of an era. 
During the summer of 1953 the United States served notice on 
Britain and France that if the Communists broke the cease-fire 
agreement in Korea we would immediately launch a major 
war against China. Both Britain and France agreed to sup- 
port this stand. Many did not realize it at the time, but by 
this action the United States was passing the death sentence 
on a twenty-year-old policy of Communist appeasement. 

The Role of the FBI 
in the Battle of the Underground 

No one could have welcomed the end of appeasement with 
greater relief than John Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI and 
the number-one law enforcement personality in the United 


The Naked Communist 


States. Since 1919 he had struggled to illuminate the minds 
of government leaders as well as the public generally concern- 
ing the conspiratorial nature of Communism. As an assistant 
to the Attorney General in 1919 he had prepared one of the 
first legal briefs reflecting the subversive aspects of the world- 
wide Communist movement. 

During the twenty years of appeasement, when many 
Americans had been lulled into a sense of security by the 
“sweet talk of Communist United Front propaganda,” John 
Edgar Hoover had struck out with two-fisted blows at the Red 
menace which was gnawing at the vitals of American life : 

“The American Communist . . . must be placed in the same 
category as the Ku Klux Klan, the now defunct German- 
American Bund, and other totalitarian groups. ... As common 
criminals seek the cover of darkness, Communists, behind the 
protection of false fronts, carry on their sinister and vicious 
program, intent on swindling and robbing Americans of their 
heritage of freedom.” 

John Edgar Hoover was a great disappointment to the 
Communists. In most countries the Red leaders had been able 
to completely discredit the agencies handling the police pow- 
ers of government by blasting them with charges of corrup- 
tion and violation of civil liberties. However, the Director of 
the FBI had spent his adult lifetime building the FBI so that 
the public would know that any such charges would be false 
and fraudulent. Over the years the public had learned that 
FBI agents spent as much time checking out innocent suspects 
as they spent in ferreting out the guilty. In fact, by careful 
investigation and humane treatment of the guilty, the FBI 
had secured confessions in 85 per cent of its cases. 4 

Therefore, the Communists were deeply disappointed 
with the results of their campaign to portray the FBI as an 
American Gestapo. The Communists leaders were further em- 
bittered by the knowledge that the FBI had trained its per- 
sonnel to be just what governmental officers in a free nation 


4 The role of the FBI is well presented in “the fbi story,” by Don 
Whitehead, Random House, 1956. 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


should be — alert, intelligent, scientific and hard working. And 
what particularly frightened the Reds was the quiet methodi- 
cal way in which Bureau agents went after subversives — all of 
which foreshadowed a day of reckoning for Communist 
strategists. It came July 20, 1948, when all the top leaders 
of the Communist Party of America were indicted. The 
“Big Eleven” who stood trial were all convicted. Six of their 
attorneys were also fined or imprisoned for contemptuous con- 
duct during the trial. Four of the eleven Communists jumped 
their $20,000 bail bond and the FBI had to launch an inter- 
national investigation to have them returned. 

Shortly afterwards the Government became convinced 
that Soviet espionage agents had been stealing atomic in- 
formation and the FBI was given jurisdiction. Within weeks 
the FBI had gristed through tons of records, interviewed hun- 
dreds of “restricted” employees at various atomic energy 
plants and emerged from the slow elimination process to point 
the finger of justice at a physicist, Klaus Fuchs, who had spent 
considerable time at Los Alamos. However, at that moment 
the German-born, naturalized Britisher was the dignified di- 
rector of England’s atomic energy establishment at Harwell. 

Acting on the FBI tip that Klaus Fuchs was the principal 
suspect in the subversion of the free world’s monopoly of 
the atomic bomb, British Intelligence went to work. Within 
one month they saw some evidence that the FBI might be right. 
After another month they had no doubt about it. On Febru- 
ary 3, 1949, the British announced that Fuchs had been ar- 
rested and had made a full confession. 

Fuch’s confession sent the FBI on another hunt. Fuchs 
said he gave packets of information dealing with the atomic 
bomb to a person known to him only as “Raymond.” This 
person had to be identified and located since he was apparently 
the courier who delivered the bomb secrets to the Soviet Con- 
sulate in New York. Although the FBI had nothing to start 
with but a physical description, a phony name and the possi- 
bility that the courier might be a chemist, agents finally came 
up with the right man. It was Harry Gold. 

Harry Gold confessed and this enabled the FBI to finally 


The Naked Communist 


unravel the answer to a question which had puzzled the whole 
nation : ‘How did the Russians get hold of information on 
the ingenious trigger mechanism of the atomic bomb which 
should have taken the Russians many years to discover?” Har- 
ry Gold said they stole it. The FBI once more took up the 
trail and this time it led to the doorstep of two U.S. citizens, 
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. 

The investigation revealed that Julius Rosenberg had 
pressured his young brother-in-law, David Greenglass, to turn 
over to Harry Gold and himself all the basic information about 
the trigger device without which the bomb could not be ex- 
ploded. David Greenglass worked at the atomic energy labora- 
tory at Los Alamos and had a rather intimate knowledge of 
the construction of the bomb and the lens apparatus by which 
it was detonated. Greenglass was finally induced to draw up 
sketches of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima and to provide de- 
tailed drawings of the detonator lens. The Rosenbergs then 
channeled this information into the regular Russian espionage 
apparatus. 

As soon as the Communist scientists received this data 
they quickly closed the gap in the atomic race and exploded a 
Russian bomb. It will be recalled that this came as a great 
shock to the startled West. The Red leaders capitalized on this 
temporary advantage by rattling their atomic sabers and tell- 
ing the Communist leaders in China and North Korea to start 
casting about for some early military conquest. Eagerly they 
went to work preparing for the Korean War. In fact, by the 
time Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had been convicted and were 
ready for sentence the United States was in the midst of the 
Korean conflict. Thousands of American lives were being 
sacrificed to hold back the tide of desolation which the Rosen- 
bergs had helped to turn loose. 

Judge Irving Robert Kaufman looked down at this man 
and woman and said : 

“Plain, deliberate contemplated murder is dwarfed in 
magnitude by comparison with the crime you have commit- 
ted. ... I believe your conduct in putting into the hands of the 
Russians the A-bomb, years before our best scientists pre- 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


dieted Russia would perfect the bomb has already caused in 
my opinion, the Communist aggression in Korea, with the re- 
sultant casualties exceeding 50,000 and who knows but that 
millions more of innocent people may pay the price of your 
treason. Indeed, by your betrayal you undoubtedly have 
altered the course of history . . . What I am about to say is not 
easy for me. I have deliberated for hours, days and nights .... 
I have searched the records — I have searched my conscience 
— to find some reason for mercy — for it is only human to be 
merciful and it is natural to try and spare lives. I am con- 
vinced, however, that I would violate the solemn and sacred 
trust that the people of this land have placed in my hands were 
I to show leniency to the defendants Rosenberg. It is not in 
my power, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, to forgive you. Only 
the Lord can find mercy for what you have done . . . you are 
hereby sentenced to the punishment of death.” 

David Greenglass was sentenced to fifteen years. 

It was a tragic chapter in American history, but it ver- 
ified Mr. Hoover’s original assertion that the Red leaders “carry 
on their sinister and vicious program, intent on swindling and 
robbing Americans of their heritage of freedom.” 

But John Edgar Hoover knew that the communist revo- 
lutionists would never try to strike their final, deadly blow at 
the United States as long as they were losing the battle of 
the underground. He also felt that carefully selected and 
carefully trained young Americans could match strategems 
with the Red leaders and win. The history of the FBI dur- 
ing Mr. Hoover’s remarkable administration gives ample 
justification for his feelings of enthusiasm and complete con- 
fidence in the ultimate victory of America’s underground 
soldiers of freedom. 

The Crack in the Iron Curtain 

By 1953 the Kremlin was not only suffering embarrass- 
ment abroad but a wide crack in the Iron Curtain revealed that 


The Naked Communist 


the Communist empire was in desperate straits at home. The 
myth of Communist strength and unity was uncovered. In 
East Germany riots broke out as the people faced tanks with 
bricks and bare hands. To make matters worse, insubordi- 
nate Russian officers and soldiers had to be executed for re- 
fusing to fire into the German crowds. A rash of uprisings 
also broke out in Czechoslovakia and threatened to break out 
in Poland, Bulgaria and the Ukraine. 

Economists discovered from admissions of Malenkov in 
his speeches and official releases that Russians were working 
38 hours a week for food that took only 26 hours to earn in 
1928. Furthermore, Russia — with a substantial increase in 
population— was producing less food under State Socialism 
than she had produced under the NEP in 1928. The riots 
in the satellite countries were the result of the realization that 
Russia would probably never fulfill her propaganda promise to 
furnish them food, clothing and machinery. On the contrary, 
the bankrupt U.S.S.R. had been feeding like a great parasite 
on the satellite countries. 

In contrast to the Iron Curtain countries the Western 
European nations were enjoying the greatest period of pros- 
perity in forty years. The American people had donated 
50 billion dollars to the post-war recovery of these countries 
and they were rapidly reaching the point where they could 
begin to stand alone. There was a healthy resurgence of 
faith in free enterprise capitalism as the United States reached 
the zenith of its prosperity and demonstrated its capacity to 
not only produce more wealth than any other nation but to dis- 
tribute it more equitably among its people. 

A leading Socialist in Britain, Professor W. Arthur Lewis, 
openly acknowledged that Socialism had been a great disap- 
pointment in England: “What has been done ... is to transfer 
property not to the workers but to the Government. Workers 
continue to be employees, subject to all the frustrations of 
working under orders in large undertakings. . . . Those who 
expected nationalization to raise wages have . . . been disap- 
pointed. ... It does not solve the problem of labor relations ; 
it reduces private wealth ... it raises unsolved problems of 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


control; and it raises the issue of how much power we want 
our Government to have.” 5 

The Communist Conquest in Indo-China 

After the Korean Armistice the Chinese Communists did 
not allow Russia’s domestic problems to dull their appetite 
for further aggression. They marched off to complete the 
Red conquest of Indo-China. Originally the war in Indo- 
China had been an attempt by the native population to free 
itself from French colonialism. However, Red infiltration by 
the Communist Chinese had finally changed the conflict from 
a war for freedom to a war between France and the Chinese 
Reds. The compromising influence of the French Communist 
Party (the largest single party in France) made the fatal 
outcome of the war dependent only on the passing of time. 
Defeat to the French came on July 21, 1954. At Geneva the 
Red Chinese jubilantly agreed to stop fighting in exchange 
for 12,000,000 people and 61,000 square miles of Indo-China. 

Mao Tse-tung was now intoxicated with double success. 
Even Russia felt it necessary to make concessions to Mao and 
his Chinese Communists in order to insure their continued 
loyalty to the Communist Motherland. In October, 1954, Rus- 
sian officials trekked to Peiping and flattered Mao with the 
following promises: 

1. To evacuate Port Arthur which Russia was authorized 
to lease at Yalta. 

2. To sell to China (on easy terms) the railroads and 
other industries which Russia had been operating since 
the war as a “Partner.” 

3. To loan China 130,000,000 dollars. 

4. To help build two railroads across China. 

5. To help China build 15 new heavy industrial projects. 

6. To campaign for the seizure of Formosa. 


8 “u. s. NEWS AND world report,” “Socialists Sour on Socialism," 
July 8, 1955, p. 48. 


The Naked Communist 


1. To campaign for the inclusion of Japan in the Com- 
munist orbit. 

It was apparent that even though Russia was talking 
“peaceful coexistence” the free world would have little relief 
from the war-making plans of Red China. 


The Task of Isolating a World Aggressor 


From the point of view of the United States, the Indo- 
China fiasco was a dismal political tragedy. The 100 Com- 
munists in the French Parliament (who even refused to stand 
in tribute to the French war dead) engineered the collapse of 
the seven-year war. As the U.S. Secretary of State addressed 
the armistice meeting at Geneva he lashed out at the cowardice 
and subversion which had sacrificed 12,000,000 more human 
beings to Red aggression: “Peace,” he said, “is always easy 
to achieve— by surrender. Unity is also easy to achieve— by 
surrender. The hard task, the task that confronts us, is to 
combine peace and unity with Freedom !” 

Secretary Dulles left Geneva to carry out a feverish, 
round-the-world campaign to get all free nations to make an 
agonizing reappraisal” of the ridiculous concessions which 
were being made to Communist imperialism. In 20 months 
he covered over 152,000 miles and when he was through the 
United States had become a party to (or strengthened its 
position in) a chain of regional compacts specifically designed 
to reinforce Communist containment. To the dismay of the 
Soviet strategists, Article 52 of the UN Charter contained a 
loophole which permitted this procedure. Therefore, the 
United States openly began to use NATO, SEATO and similar 
regional organizations as collective agencies for mutual secur- 
ity. To a large extent this nullified the paralyzing choke-hold 
which the Soviets had previously held on the West through its 
abusive use of the veto power in the UN Security Council. 

The United States also announced that she did not intend 
to sit back and watch Russia construct its armada of long- 


Post-War Communist Attacks 


range bombers which Communist press releases described as 
capable of dropping H-bombs on American cities. The U.S. 
answer to this was the rapid construction of a ring of U.S. 
defense bases on the fringe of the Iron Curtain. Immediately 
the roar of an injured bear came thundering out of Russia: 
“We are being threatened with annihilation!” 

Secretary Dulles soberly reaffirmed a truth which he 
was well aware the Communists already knew — namely, that 
no nation need fear these bases except an aggressor. Then 
he expounded in clear-cut, hard-hitting terminology the new 
U.S. doctrine of “massive retaliation” which he warned would 
be triggered instantly in case the Soviet Empire dared fulfill 
its oft repeated threat of a surprise attack on the free world. 

For awhile there was an ominous silence in Moscow. 


Russia Tests the New U.S. “ Get Tough” Policy 

Toward the latter part of 1954 it became apparent that 
serious political adjustments were going on inside Russia. A 
bellicose, bullet-headed personality named Nikita S. Khrush- 
chev and a punctilious party politician named Nikolai Bulgan- 
in began to appear more frequently in the news. An ex-Soviet 
official (Nikolai E. Khokhlov) declared this to be a bad sign. 
He described Khrushchev and Bulganin as promoters of world 
Communism, in contrast to Malenkov and Beria who wanted 
first to improve living conditions for Russians. 

In the fall of 1954, Khrushchev and Bulganin led a delega- 
tion to Peiping. There the Chinese were given instructions 
to prepare for an assault on Formosa. From this, it became 
apparent that completely new lines of power had been drawn 
in Russia. Eventually it came out that Malenkov had deserted 
his partner, Beria, and joined forces with the new Khrushchev- 
Bulganin forces. In the latter part of December, Beria and 
three of his aides were shot. Malenkov was summarily demoted 
but he had switched sides in time to save his life. Bulganin 
took his place and Khrushchev hovered in the backround set- 
ting policy and announcing the new slogans, “return to heavy 


The Naked Communist 


206 industry — armaments” and “the growing of food by decree.” 

Meanwhile the Chinese Communists had also caught the 
spirit of the new leadership and began fronting for Moscow by 
tantalizing the democracies with the shocking announcement 
that they had deliberately held back U.S. officers and men in 
violation of the prisoner-exchange agreement at the close of 
the Korean War. 

The armistice agreement at Panmunjom had specifically 
provided that all UN prisoners who desired repatriation would 
be returned even though some of them might be charged with 
some crime. Now, however, the Chinese Communists were 
defiantly announcing that they had secretly held back a number 
of American prisoners because they were charged with espi- 
onage or some other type of crime. U.S. indignation reached 
a white heat as many Americans began to realize for the first 
time how completely impossible it is to depend on a Communist 
pledge. 

In spite of public indignation, however, American feelings 
were somewhat compromised at this particular moment by a 
rapidly growing desire on the part of many citizens to forget 
the whole foreign “mess” and get on with home-front develop- 
ments which promised to provide an all-time record of Ameri- 
can free enterprise prosperity. 

Mao Tse-tung accurately diagnosed this national feeling 
as an anti-war sentiment, and he therefore accelerated his 
campaign of propaganda throughout Asia by representing the 
United States as a “paper tiger.” He taunted the United 
States with additional disclosures of illegally-held American 
prisoners of war and by open implication boastfully defied the 
United States Government to try and do something about it. 

He became so enthusiastic in his campaign that he finally 
decided to prove the impotency of American influence to all 
the world by acting on Khrushchev’s fighting orders and strike 
at Formosa. In a matter of weeks the offshore islands in the 
hands of the Nationalists began to be bombed from the Chinese 
mainland. It was the preliminary phase of an all-out attack 
on Chiang Kai-shek’s last outpost. 

This was a highly critical hour for the United States since 


Posf-War Communist Attacks 


she had committed herself to defend Formosa. If she wavered, 
the light of freedom could very easily go out in Southeast 
Asia. One-half billion “neutral” Asians also watched keenly 
as U.S. leaders measured the risk and fathomed the depths of 
their own moral convictions. 

Early in February, 1955, the Chinese Reds and the other 
World Communists got their answer. It was a U.S. Con- 
gressional resolution supported by both parties which con- 
firmed the authority of the President of the United States to 
throw the Seventh Fleet into the Formosa Straits and give 
orders to wage an all-out war if attacked. This would obvious- 
ly include the use of nuclear weapons. 

The “little nations” of South East Asia stood up and 
cheered. It was apparent that the U.S. not only had the will 
to talk “massive retaliation” but the will to wage it. At the 
Afro-Asian conference at Bandung several of the little nations 
boldly showed their colors. They badgered the Chinese Com- 
munist delegates with cries of “Communist colonialism” and 
“Communist aggression.” It was a severe blow to the pres- 
tige and propaganda of Mao Tse-tung and his Communist 
backers in Moscow. 

Within a matter of weeks the “stand firm” policy of the 
U.S. and her Pacific Allies began bearing miraculous fruit. 
Orders went out from Moscow that coexistence was once more 
the sweet theme of the hour. The Chinese began releasing U.S. 
prisoners they had held illegally. The issue of Formosa was 
allowed to slip quietly into the background. Khrushchev ex- 
tended an invitation to the United States to exchange visitors 
— editors, congressmen, farmers — he even said he might come 
himself, sometime. All over the world the hard-knuckled 
tension of the ten post-war years began to subside. There 
seemed to be general satisfaction with the new and unexpected 
turn of events throughout the world and the democracies set- 
tled back once more to the pursuit of their own normal do- 
mestic affairs. 

But in the midst of it all came a sinister warning from 
military intelligence. Reports indicated that while the empha- 
sis of “soft” policies toward the democracies was being pro- 


The Naked Communist 


moted abroad, a tough, imperialistic policy was being fed to 
the troops at home. Soviet troops were being taught that “the 
importance of the surprise factor in contemporary war has 
increased enormously,” and “the Communist Party demands 
that the whole personnel of our Army and Navy should be 
imbued with the spirit of maximum vigilance and constant 
and high military preparedness, so as to be able to wrest the 
initiative from the hands of the enemy, and, having delivered 
smashing blows against him, finally defeat him completely.” 6 

All this had a familiar spirit. It reminded alert Ameri- 
cans of a significant statement made by Dimitry Z. Manuilsky 
who represented the U.S.S.R. in presiding over the Security 
Council of the United Nations in 1949. At the Lenin School 
of Political Warfare in Moscow he had taught: “War to the 
hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable. Today, 
of course, we are not strong enough to attack. ... To win we 
shall need the element of surprise. The bourgeoisie will have 
to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most 
spectacular peace movements on record. There will be elec- 
trifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist 
countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in 
their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to 
be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash 
them with our clenched fist!” 7 


6 Article in “pravda,” May 5, 1955, by Major General D. Korniyenko. 


7 Quoted by Joseph Z. Kornfeder who was a student at the school. 
In a letter to Dr. J. D. Bales of Harding College dated March 7, 
1961, Mr. Kornfeder said: “ Enclosed is a copy of the quote you 
asked for. It is part of what he (Manuilsky) said to a group of 
senior Lenin School students at a conference held in Moscow, March, 
1930, at which I, as one of the students, was present.” 


Khrushchev 


X 

Communism Under Khrushchev 


By 1955 it was vividly apparent that the most vicious 
kind of political in-fighting was being waged in Moscow by 
the Communist contestants for Stalin’s throne. Already 
Beria and his aides had been shot. There were signs of vast 
power shifts behind the scenes and out of the rancor and 
roar of the secret battle in the Kremlin the personality which 
seemed to be emerging on top of the conspiratorial heap was 
Nikita Khrushchev. 

Of all the contenders for power in Russia, Khrushchev 
was probably the least well known in the West. Therefore, a 
U.S. Congressional committee decided to get the Khrushchev 
story. They invited anyone who had known Khrushchev to 
come in and testify. A stream of witnesses responded, but 
the story they told was gruesome and ugly. The hopes of 
many Western diplomats for improved Russian relations col- 
lapsed as they heard the record of the Red leader with whom 
free men would now have to deal. Here was no ordinary 
Communist politician or party hack. Khrushchev was revealed 


The Haked Communist 


to be a creature of criminal cunning with an all-consuming 
passion for power. 


Khrushchev as the Dictator of the Ukraine 

Many of the witnesses told of the early days when 
Khrushchev was first grasping for power and recognition. 
They revealed that his loyalty to Communism was the blind, 
senseless kind. Having been raised almost an illiterate, 
Khrushchev did not get his elementary education until after 
he had become a full-grown adult. As a boy he had been a 
shepherd, later learning the trade of blacksmith and lock- 
smith. At 17 he ran away from the obscure Ukrainian village 
of Kalinovka where he had been born April 17, 1894. For 
several years Khrushchev was a roaming itinerant worker but 
in 1918 he joined the Communist Party and fought with the 
Red Army during the Russian civil war. In 1922 he com- 
menced his first formal education which lasted three years. 
By 1929 his dogged party loyalty had won him a berth in the 
Joseph Stalin Industrial Academy, and by 1931 he had be- 
come a local party official in Moscow. 

Khrushchev soon won favor with Stalin by joining in a 
drive to purge Stalin’s enemies from the local party machin- 
ery. More than 500 men and women were turned over to 
the secret police for execution. Later Stalin said that while 
Khrushchev was repulsive to him, he was impressed with the 
Ukrainian s capacity to kill or turn on old friends when party 
policy demanded it. Stalin therefore assigned Khrushchev 
the task of going back to the Ukraine and forcing his own 
people to live under the lash of total Communist suppression. 
The Red leaders had been using wholesale executions to stifle 
resistance. Khrushchev said he had a better way. He would 
use mass starvation! Witnesses to this man-made famine told 
of the suffering and death : 

Nicholas prychodoko: I observed covered wagons mov- 
ing along the street on which I lived and also on other streets 
in Kiev. They were hauling corpses for disposal. . . . These 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


were peasants who flocked to the cities for some crust of 
bread. . . . My personal friend . . . was a surgeon at a hospital 
in the Ukraine. ... He put a white frock on me, just as he was 
in a white frock, and we went outside to a very large garage 
in the hospital area. He and I entered it. When he switched 
on the light, I saw 2,000 to 3,000 corpses laid along the walls. 

MR. arens: What caused the death of these people? 

MR. PRYCHODOKO: Starvation. 

MR. arens: What caused the starvation? 

MR. prychodoko: . . . We found some statistics in hiding 
places in the cellar of the Academy of Sciences. They re- 
vealed that the food in 1932 was sufficient to feed all Ukrain- 
ians for 2 years and 4 months. But except for about 10 per 
cent, the crop was immediately dispatched from the threshing 
machines for export to parts outside of Ukraine. That was 
the cause of the hunger. 

mr. arens: Why did the Communist regime seize the 
crops in Ukraine during this period? 

MR. PRYCHODOKO: Because at all times there was . . . 
various kinds of resistance to the Communist government in 
Ukraine and the collectivization drive in Moscow. . . . 

MR. arens: How many people were starved to death by 
this man-made famine in Ukraine in the thirties? 

MR. prychodoko: It is estimated to be 6 to 7 million, 
most of them peasants. 1 

Witnesses testified that after millions of lives had been 
destroyed under Khrushchev’s administration, the collectiv- 
ized farms were finally set up. Khrushchev was rewarded in 
1934 when Stalin appointed him to the powerful Central 
Committee of the Communist hierarchy in Moscow. 

However, because of continued unrest and resistance to 
Communism, Khrushchev was sent back to the Ukraine as its 
political dictator in 1938. Once again the people were sub- 
jected to a vast purge. So violently did they react to this 
new barbarity that when World War II broke out and the 


1 “the crimes of Khrushchev,” House Committee on Un-American 
Activities, September, 1959, Part 2, pp. 1-2. 


The Naked Communist 


Nazis moved in the Germans were welcomed by the Ukrainians 
as liberators. Nikita Khrushchev never forgave them for that. 
Before fleeing toward Moscow, he poured out his vengeance 
against them. Official reports show that when the Nazis 
arrived, they found numerous mass graves. In one area 
alone there were over 90 mammoth burial plots containing 
approximately 10,000 bodies of “peasants, workers and 
priests,” each with hands tied behind the back and a bullet 
in the head. 

After the Germans were driven out in 1944, Khrush- 
chev once more returned to the Ukraine grimly determined 
to annihilate “all collaborationists.” Whole segments of the 
population were deported, a complete liquidation of the prin- 
cipal Christian churches was launched, “people’s leaders” 
were arrested and executed, and the NKVD was turned loose 
on the populace with a terrible ferocity intended to terrorize 
the people and eliminate all resistance to the Communist re- 
occupation. “Hangman of the Ukraine” became the people’s 
title for Nikita Khrushchev. 

By 1949 Khrushchev had so completely demonstrated his 
total dedication to Stalin that he was returned to Moscow as 
the secretary of the powerful Central Committee. He was 
then given the assignment of trying to make the sluggish cen- 
tralized farms produce more food. Khrushchev used terror 
tactics to get more work and more produce, but he failed. 
Khrushchev could raise only enough food to keep the people 
at a bare-subsistence level. 

This was the status of Khrushchev at the time of Stalin’s 
death. 


How Khrushchev Seized Power 

When Stalin died March 5, 1953, he left a bristling nest 
of problems for his quarreling Communist comrades. Each 
Red leader carefully eyed his competitors, weighing the pos- 
sibility of seizing power. Khrushchev immediately went to 
work maneuvering for a position of strategic strength. Com- 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


pared to the other Red leaders, Khrushchev was described 
both inside and outside of Russia as “low man on the totem 
pole.” 

The first in terms of strength was Malenkov, secretary 
of Stalin, who had charge of all secret Communist files. It 
was said he had collected so much damning evidence on the 
others that they tried to curry his favor by pushing him for- 
ward as the temporary head of the government. 

The second in line was Beria, hated leader of the secret 
police and an administrator of the nuclear development pro- 
gram, all of which gave him a hard core force of 2,000,000 
armed men. 

The third in line was Molotov, intimate Bolshevik asso- 
ciate of Stalin himself and the most shrewd, deceptive diplo- 
mat Soviet Russia had ever produced. 

The fourth in line was Bulganin, official representative 
of the Communist Party in the Red Army and therefore the 
Red Army’s principal politician. 

The fifth in line was Khrushchev, head of the State col- 
lectivized farms. 

Many people did not take Khrushchev seriously. They 
thought of him merely as the paunchy, bullet-headed hatchet 
man of Stalin. But Khrushchev took himself seriously. Dog- 
gedly and desperately he pushed for every possible personal 
advantage. His method was to use an old Communist trick 
which is the very opposite of “divide and conquer.” His 
technique was to “unite and conquer.” 

First he united with Premier Malenkov. He convinced 
Malenkov that Beria was his greatest threat, his greatest 
enemy. In December, 1954, Beria and his associates were 
arrested and shot. 

Now Khrushchev united with Bulganin to get rid of 
Malenkov. Khrushchev told the bearded political army leader 
that he (Bulganin) should be premier instead of Malenkov. 
Bulganin heartily agreed. Immediately there was a shift of 
power behind the scenes which permitted Bulganin to replace 
Malenkov by the spring of 1955. 

Molotov was the next to fall. He had no machine in back 


The Naked Communist 


2J4 of him but had depended upon his prestige as Stalin’s partner. 
Suddenly he found himself exiled to the Mongolian border. 

Now the partnership of Bulganin and Khrushchev began 
running the entire Communist complex. But Khrushchev 
was not through. His next step was to persuade Bulganin to 
force Marshal Zhukov of World War II fame into retirement 
and to demote other key officials in the government. Some 
of these officials were the very ones who had originally spon- 
sored Khrushchev’s promotions in previous years. Suddenly 
they found themselves politically emasculated. By destroying 
his friends as well as his enemies, Khrushchev felt he was 
preventing them from regrouping and ousting him the way 
he was ousting them. 

Finally Khrushchev was prepared for the big step — to 
oust Bulganin. By forcing Bulganin to get rid of Marshal 
Zhukov, Khrushchev created a rift between Bulganin and his 
main source of support, the Red Army. This allowed Khrush- 
chev to move into the breach and fill powerful key positions 
with his own followers. By 1956 Bulganin found himself the 
captive puppet of Khrushchev. For two more years Khrush- 
chev ran the government through Bulganin, but there was no 
question whatever as to who was in line for Stalin’s throne. 

Such was Nikita Khrushchev’s slippery and dangerous 
ascent to the summit. 

But all of these battles in the Kremlin and the resulting 
shift of power had not solved the terrifying economic problems 

which continued to plague Soviet socialism. Nowhere in 

China, Russia or the satellites — was Communism proving 
successful. Uprisings had been occurring for over three years 
in the Communist-controlled countries. Heavy Soviet arma- 
ment had to be maintained in all of them. 

Just as Khrushchev was consolidating his power in 1956, 
a major satellite cut loose and struck for freedom. 

The Hungarian Revolution — 1956 

While bargaining for American lend-lease during World 
War II, Stalin had promised that any nation coming under 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


the domination of the Red Army during the war would be 
allowed free elections and self-determination after the war. 
Hungary was the first nation to demand self-government and 
the overthrow of the Communist regime. 

Perhaps no better historical example exists to illustrate 
the extreme treachery to which Khrushchev would extend 
himself than the Hungarian Revolution. 

On the 23rd of October, 1956, a massive but peaceful 
demonstration took place in Budapest with thousands of 
people participating. The people said they wanted to end 
Soviet colonial rule and set up a democratic government with 
free elections. When the crowds refused to disband, the Rus- 
sian secret police were ordered to fire on them. Thus the 
revolution began. The first major action of the revolution was 
toppling down the hugh statue of Stalin, the symbol of Soviet 
domination. The freedom fighters then hoisted the Hungarian 
flag on the stump. Soviet occupation troops were immediately 
ordered in to smash the revolution, but they were resisted by 
Communist trained Hungarian troops who defected and 
joined the Freedom Fighters. Many of the Soviet occupation 
troops also defected. As a result, the remaining Soviet troops 
were beaten in five days. Then General Bela Kiraly des- 
cribes what happened: 

“To avoid annihilation of the Soviet units, Khru- 
shchev himself carried out one of his most sinister actions. 
He sent to Budapest his first deputy, Mikoyan; and he sent 
Mr. Suslov from the party leadership. These two Soviet 
men sat down with the revolutionary government. They 
found out they were defeated. After talking with Khru- 
shchev by means of the telephone — and by the approval of 
Khrushchev they concluded an armistice. . . . Diplomatic 
actions ivere further developed. ... It was positively de- 
clared that the aim of further diplomatic negotiations 
(would be) hoiv to ivithdraw the Soviet troops from 


The Naked Communist 


Hungary and how to allow Hungary to regain her national 
independence.’’* 

The Soviet representatives proposed that final details be 
drawn up at the Soviet headquarters in Tokol, a village 
south of Budapest. The entire Hungarian delegation was 
theiefore invited to come and discuss the precise date when 
Soviet troops would leave Hungary. In response to this invi- 
tation, the elated and victorious Hungarians went to the 
Soviet headquarters. To their amazement they were suddenly 
surrounded, siezed and imprisoned. Simultaneously a new 
all-out attack was ordered by Khrushchev against the whole 
Hungarian population. 

The new Soviet attack was in the form of a massive in- 
vasion. It involved 5,000 tanks and a quarter of a million 
soldiers. They poured in from Czechoslovakia, Russia and 
Rumania. On Sunday, November 4, 1956, the radio station 
in Budapest pleaded : 

“People of the world, listen to our call! Help its. 
Please do not forget that this wild attack of Bolshevism 
ivill not stop. You may be the next victim. Save us' 
SOS. SOS” 3 

A little later the voice said: 

“ People of the civilized world, in the name of liberty 
and solidarity, we are asking you to help. Our ship is 
sinking. The light vanishes. The shadows grow darker 
from hour to hour. Listen to our cry. . . . God be with 
you — and with us." 

That was all. The station went off the air. 

As the student of history contemplates those tragic days, 
lie cannot help but wonder: Where was the conscience of the 
Free West? Where was the UN? Where were the forces of 
NATO? What had happened to the whole fabric of gilded 
promises of the UN made at San Francisco in 1945 : 


the chimes of Khrushchev,” House Committee on Un-American 
Activities, 1959, Part ■}, p. 12. 

•■'“HOW a FREE nation was killed,” U.S. News and World Report 
November 19, 195(1, p. 94. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


. . to save succeeding generations from the scourge 
of war. 

“. . . to reaffirm faith in fundamental rights, in the 
dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal 
rights of men and women and of nations large and small. 
“. . . to establish . . . respect for the obligations arising 
from treaties. 

“ ... to ensure that armed force shall not be used.” 

(PREAMBLE UN CHARTER) 

As it turned out, the massacre of tens of thousands of 
Hungarians finally smothered into oblivion the heroic Hun- 
garian fight for freedom. Prime Minister Imre Nagy was 
executed. Most of the other leaders of the revolution were 
deported to Russia and never heard of again. In the UN 
Security Council America’s Ambassador Lodge introduced a 
resolution proposing that Russia be censured for this atro- 
cious Hungarian attack. Russia vetoed it! 

This amazing and treacherous series of events was per- 
sonally supervised by Nikita Khrushchev. Without any serious 
challenge whatever, he was allowed to carry them out in direct 
violation of the Yalta agreement, the Warsaw Pact and the 
first two articles of the UN Charter. It was the greatest op- 
portunity the Western Bloc had ever had to show whether or 
not the mighty and strong had the courage to expel Russia 
and then put the high-sounding phrases of the UN to work. 

Instead, the UN appointed a committee to gather the 
facts, prepare a report, and then submit it to the General 
Assembly. 

This gave pro-Soviet forces an additional chance to pull 
sensitive strings in the UN and further obscure the vicious 
conquest of Hungary. 

The UN Investigation of the 
Hungarian Revolution 

The average American has no conception of the deep 
penetration of the Communist conspiracy inside the United 
Nations. 


The Naked Communist 


A Danish diplomat, Povl Bang-Jensen, said he began feel- 
ing strong Communist pressures soon after he started serving 
as the deputy secretary of the UN committee which was in- 
vestigating the Russian attack on Hungary. 4 He claimed pro- 
Soviet influence came sweeping down upon him from the Secre- 
tary General’s office and even from many of the committee 
members. Bang-Jensen did not know where to turn for help. 
Finally he started writing protests both to the committee and 
the Secretary General. He pointed out errors in the report 
which would allow the Russians to discredit it. He said the 
Committee Chairman had refused to correct these errors. He 
stated that important facts were being eliminated which es- 
tablished the official responsibility of the Russian government 
for what had happened. He also noted that the committee was 
going soft in its treatment of Janos Kadar who headed up 
the new Communist puppet government in Hungary. 

But most of all, Povl Bang-Jensen was outraged when 
the Secretary General demanded that he reveal the secret list 
of Hungarian witnesses. He had been authorized in writing 
to tell the witnesses that their names would never be dis- 
closed since this would bring cruel and immediate reprisal on 
their families in Hungary. Bang-Jensen stood by this com- 
mitment. He declared that turning over the names to the UN 
Secretariat would permit possible leaks to the Russians. The 
word was already getting around the UN that Russian agents 
were offering extravagant bribes to anyone who would get 
them the list. 

Suddenly Bang-Jensen found the UN Secretariat and the 
investigating committee attacking him personally. Instead of 
dealing with the issues, high UN officials began describing 
Povl Bang-Jensen as “mentally ill.” 

Three leading American employees in the UN participated 
in the attack on Bang-Jensen. They were Andrew Wellington 
Cordier, a former associate of Alger Hiss, who had become 
No. 2 man in the UN ; Ernest A. Gross who had tried to get 

4 The Bang-J ensen cane is treated fully in a recent hook, “betrayal 
at tiie UN," by DeWitt Copp and Marshall Peek, Devin-Adair, 
unit. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


the United States to allow recognition of Red China; and Dr. 
Ralph Bunche, UN Under Secretary, who was one of the 
first to put the “mentally ill” label on Bang-Jensen in an offi- 
cial memorandum. 

Gradually Povl Bang-Jensen felt himself going down 
under the avalanche of opposition. When the UN officials could 
not force him to disclose the secret list of Hungarian wit- 
nesses, he was ordered to burn them in the presence of a UN 
representative. This he did. Then they fired him. Povl Bang- 
Jensen was discharged by Dag Hammarskjold on December 
4, 1957. Nevertheless the UN pressure against Bang-Jensen as 
a mentally-ill person continued. Derogatory reports from the 
UN prevented him from securing several highly important 
positions. 

For some time Bang-Jensen had also feared the possibility 
of physical harm. He had been a Danish underground fighter 
against the Nazis and Communists in World War II and was 
familiar with the technique of doing away with an enemy by 
making it look like a suicide. Therefore he wrote the follow- 
ing note to his wife on November 30, 1957 : 

“Under no circumstances whatsoever would I ever 
commit suicide. This would be contrary to my whole na- 
ture and to my religious convictions. If any note was 
found to the opposite effect in my handivriting , it would 
be a fake.” 

It was Thanksgiving Day, 1959, that the body of Povl 
Bang-Jensen was found in a secluded area two miles from his 
home with a bullet hole in his head. A pistol and scribbled 
note were by his side. 

He had left home 72 hours earlier to catch a bus. The 
coroner found he had been dead only a few hours. What had 
happened during that tragic interval of two days or more 
while Bang-Jensen was still alive? 

Professional investigators suspected murder. If so, it was 
carefully executed to look like suicide. And suicide was the 
final, official verdict. Many x'emained unconvinced. 

But by this time the UN investigation of the Hungarian 
Revolution had long since been completed. The expurgated, 


The Naked Communist 


distorted and watered down report had been turned over to 
the UN and officially accepted by the General Assembly. 


Inside Khrushchev's Russia 


Communism has only one fragile excuse for all the un- 
paralleled brutality, cruelty and crimes against humanity 
which it commits. This is the Marx-Engels-Lenin promise 
that it is the historical shortcut to a better life for all man- 
kind. But even Communists are men with minds that seek 
tangible evidence for the faith they live by. The most bitter 
reality in the Communist hierarchy is the fact that after 40 
years of all-out effort, numerous five-year plans, the purging, 
executing, torturing and liquidation of millions of human 
beings, the Communist Motherland has still produced little 
more than a dull and monotonous existence. 

A five-year analysis of Russian economics revealed the 
humiliating fact that less economic progress had been made 
under 40 years of Communism than under the last 40 years 
of the Tsars! 5 

Although stealing technical knowledge from the West and 
kidnaping the scientists of vanquished foes has made it pos- 
sible for the Communist leaders to make several spectacular 
crash exhibitions in the technical field, nevertheless the plain 
irrefutable fact remains that Russia just cannot compete with 
capitalism in massive production. This continues to be a nest 
of cockleburs in the craw of Communist leadership. 

After 1955, when Americans were finally allowed to visit 
the Soviet Union, it was observed that the whole socialist pro- 
duction system sloppily squandered vast quantities of man- 
power. Often, for each man working, another stood idly 
looking on. Capitalistic work incentives had been introduced 
to create work motivation, but even so, monolithic socialized 
planning continued to hold back production schedules and pro- 
duction speed. 


5 “£ ussia ' s Growth Under Communism Less Rapid," by Dr. Warren 
Nutter, u. s. news and world report, November 2, 1959, p. 75. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


American tourists with eyes alert to such problems ob- 
served that Khrushchev was resorting to child labor to try 
to make up the difference. In fact, the Russian government 
admitted it was recruiting students from the schools to work 
for the farms and factories. Khrushchev announced his plan 
to limit most Russian youth to seven or eight years of 
schooling and said much of this would be at night. Only very 
select students would be allowed to go to college. 6 

As for the collectivized farms, even with half of the en- 
tire Russian population working on socialized farms the USSR 
had not been able to do more than feed the people at a 
bare-subsistence level. The fact that the American system 
permits a mere 12% of the people to produce more than 
Americans can either eat or sell stuns the comprehension of 
Red farm experts like Khrushchev. And he has made no secret 
of his resentment. Every so often he lashes out at the slug- 
gish Russian farm program. These are direct quotes from 
his 1955 speech denouncing Russian agriculture: 

“Lag in production” 

“Intolerable mismanagement” 

“State farms fail to fulfill their plan for an increase” 

“Hay fields remain unharvested” 

“No silo buildings are being erected” 

“Unfortunate situation has arisen with regard to seed” 
“For six years work has been in progress on the design of 
a tractor . . . and the tractor has not been designed" 
“Machinery is not being used on many collectivized 
farms” 

“There is considerable disorder on our state farms” 

“Cases of damage ( labor sabotage) to trucks and trac- 
tors” 

“Absenteeism” 

“Undernourished cattle delivered to the State" 

“Serious shortcomings in pig breeding ” 

“Production of milk decreased 1 0 per cent” 

“Cows bearing calves amount to only 3U per cent” 


9 “Russian Plan Cuts Down Schooling," U. s. news and world REPORT, 
October 3, 1959. 


The Naked Communist 


“Weight of fattened pigs and wool clippings decreased” 

“Americans succeeded in achieving a high level of stock 
breeding” 

“In the United States this crop (corn) gives the highest 
harvest yield.”'' 

This was the reason Khrushchev abandoned the last Five- 
Year-Plan and substituted a Seven-Year-Plan. The latest plan 
is supposed to equal U. S. production by 1965, but in 1961 
Khrushchev roared out his anger at the Russian farmers. 
There had been a continuous slump in farm production for 
five years ! 7 8 

The Hazardous Life of a Communist Dictator 

By 1958 Nikita Khrushchev had officially declared him- 
self head of the Communist Party and the supreme dictator 
of all Russia. Nevertheless he had some cold, hard facts to 
face. 

By that time the Red timetable of conquest was at a 
virtual standstill; the Iron Curtain was surrounded by NATO 
and SEATO defense bases with atomic warheads zeroed in to 
discourage Communist aggression. 

Mao and Chou, the Red Chinese leaders, were becoming 
increasingly defiant, critical and independent. 

It was taking more than six million soldiers and secret 
police to maintain the “state of siege” behind the Iron Cur- 
tain so as to give the appearance of “domestic tranquility.” 

Russia had worn out her good offices in the UN and was 
beginning to feel the united pressure of the Western Bloc. 

There was continued unrest in the satellites and large 
Red Army garrisons had to be stationed in each of them since 
the local armies were likely to join any uprising just as they 
did in Hungary. 


7 “Why Russia Is in Trouble," u. s. news and world report, February 
25, 1955, p. 58. 

s “Russ Admit 50 Per Cent Drop in Farm Output," LOS angeles 
examiner, January 11, 1961. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


There was also serious unrest in the Red Army where 
deep resentment against Khrushchev’s ruthless political de- 
capitation of Marshal Zhukov still existed. 

Khrushchev had been only partially successful in opening 
up the world market so that the Sino-Soviet Bloc could buy 
the things which its collectivized economy could not produce. 
He also faced the unpleasant fact that the Red economy was 
not in a position to pay for foreign trade because it was con- 
tinually operating on the brink of bankruptcy. 

Finally, and most important of all, Khrushchev lived under 
the constant threat of possible “regrouping” by disgruntled 
Red leaders to oust him from power the same way he had 
ousted Malenkov and Bulganin. Khrushchev felt a desperate 
need to boost his personal political status. He determined to 
achieve this by forcing the United States to honor him with 
an invitation to visit America. 

Khrushchev’s Scheme to Force the U.S. 
to Invite Him to America 

Ever since 1955 Khrushchev had tried to get the United 
States to invite him to America, but failed. Finally he decided 
to accomplish it by creating a crisis over Berlin. In 1958 he 
issued an ultimatum that America and her allies must get out 
of West Berlin by a certain date or he would turn the Com- 
munist East Germans loose on them. This demand was a 
flagrant violation of all existing treaties. When President 
Eisenhower announced that any efforts to force us out of Ber- 
lin would be met with military resistance, Khrushchev im- 
mediately said he didn’t really want war and that he thought 
the whole thing could be worked out amicably if he just came 
to the United States and talked it over with the President. 
He also mentioned on several occasions that President Eisen- 
hower would be welcome to visit Russia. 

At first President Eisenhower demurred. Bringing the 
Communist dictator to the United States was precisely what 
Secretary Dulles had warned against right up to the time of 


The Naked Communist 


his death. However, President Eisenhower felt that such a 
visit might impress Khrushchev with the power of the United 
States and deter him from hasty military action. Further- 
more, the President felt much good might arise from a visit 
to Russia by the President of the United States. It would be 
in furtherance of his own program of “people to people” re- 
lations. Therefore an official invitation was extended to the 
Communist dictator — making him the first Russian ruler ever 
to visit the United States. 

Was Khrushchev's Visit a Mistake ? 

American strategists on Communist problems immedi- 
ately warned that a serious tactical error was being made. 
Several of them testified before Congressional Committees. 
Eugene Lyons, a senior editor of The Readers Digest, a biog- 
rapher of Khrushchev and a former press correspondent in 
Russia, called the invitation to Khrushchev “a terrific victory 
for Communism.” Then he continued: 

‘‘It amounts to a body blow to the morale of the re- 
sistance in the Communist world. It’s a betrayal of the 
hopes of the enemies of Communism within that world, 
and their numbers can be counted by the hundred million. 

“The announcement of the invitation was a day of 
gloom and despair for nearly the whole population of 
every satellite country and for tens of millions inside Rus- 
sia itself .” 9 

When asked if Khrushchev’s visit to the United States 
might cause him to slow down or abandon his plans for world 
conquest, Mr. Lyons replied: 

“It’s a childish fairy tale. The Communists in high 
places are perfectly well informed about our material 
prosperity and political freedom. Khrushchev is not com- 
ing here to confirm his knowledge of our strengths, but 

!> “the crimes of Khrushchev,” House Committee on Un-American 
Activities, 1959, Part 1, p. 3. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


to feel out our weaknesses. The notion that he will be 
impressed, by our wealth and liberty to the point of 
curbing Communist ambitions is political innocence car- 
ried to extremes. . . . 

“In the first place, the new Soviet boss, despite his 
homespun exterior, is one of the bloodiest tyrants extant. 
He has come to power over mountains of corpses. Those 
of us who roll out red carpets for him will soon have red 
faces.”™ 

Even while Khrushchev was on his tour of the United 
States, Americans felt the icy thrust of numerous snarling 
threats which crept out between his propaganda boasts, his 
quaint platitudes and his offering to swear on the Bible. The 
press observed that he was supersensitive and hot tempered 
about questions on any of the following matters : 

The ruthless and illegal suppression of the Hungarian 
revolt after all of Khrushchev’s recent preachments about 
“self determination.’’ 

Questions about his role as the “Hangman of the Uk- 
raine.” 

Questions about Soviet jamming of Voice of America 
broadcasts. 

Questions about the continuous flight of thousands of 
refugees from satellite states. 


Aftermath of the Khrushchev Visit 

The whole world-wide program of Communist aggression 
was swiftly accelerated as a result of Khrushchev’s visit. 
The Communist Party in the United States came boldly out 
into the open. It began a new recruiting program. It 
openly attacked the House Committee on Un-American ac- 
tivities and marked the FBI for early dismantling if it 
succeeded in destroying the Congressional Committees. Con- 
victed Communists from the Hollywood cells moved back into 
the cinema capital and boldly began writing, producing and 


1,1 “the crimks of KHRUSHCUKV,” House Committee on Un-American 
Activities, 195: 9, Part 1, p. •>'. 


The Naked Communist 


propagandizing through multi-million dollar productions. The 
president of the Communist Party announced the launching 
of a nationwide Communist youth movement. 

The same thrust became apparent all over the world — in 
Japan, Southeast Asia, India, Africa, Cuba, Central and 
South America. Everywhere the Red tide ran stronger. The 
dire prediction of strategists like John Foster Dulles and 
Eugene Lyons had been literally fulfilled. 

Nevertheless, the visit of the Russian Dictator to the 
United States also carried a certain penalty for Khrushchev. 
This w T as the devastating effect which could result from Presi- 
dent Eisenhower’s reciprocal visit to Russia. Khrushchev was 
deeply impressed with the acclaim which Vice President 
Nixon received when he visited Russia and the satellites. He 
knew that if President Eisenhower were granted the same 
freedom of expression on radio, TV, in public meetings and 
in press interviews that Khrushchev had enjoyed in the 
United States, the pro-Communist tide could be reversed. 
Desperately, Khrushchev looked around for some semblance 
of an excuse to cancel the Eisenhower visit. Almost as 
though the Communists had planned it, a monumental excuse 
dropped into Khrushchev’s lap right out of the sky. 

The U-2 Incident 


On May 1, 1960, Francis G. Powers, piloting an unarmed 
U-2 jet reconnaissance plane, was captured 1200 miles inside 
Russia. The Communist leaders triumphantly announced that 
they had shot down the U-2 spy plane with a marvelous new 
rocket. This story was discredited when the Russians dis- 
played Power’s undamaged equipment and the U. S. monitors 
reported hearing the Russian pilots as they followed the plane 
in a forced landing. Government officials revealed that the 
U-2 plane came down because of a flameout. 

In Washington the incident created consternation. Since 
Americans were not accustomed to spying, they hardly knew 
what to do when this plane was caught spying. At first it was 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


simply claimed that the U-2 was a weather plane which must 
have “drifted.” Finally, it was rather clumsily admitted that 
the plane was in fact flying on an espionage mission with the 
highly important assignment of photographing Russian mis- 
sile bases. 

Khrushchev professed outraged indignation, criticized the 
“morals” of the American leaders for spying, and denounced 
the U-2 incident as an act of aggression. He also immediately 
announced that he was canceling President Eisenhower’s visit 
to Russia. A few days later he used the U-2 incident to scut- 
tle the Paris Summit Conference. 

Meanwhile, in America, citizens were peppering Washing- 
ton with a multitude of questions : 

Was this an isolated mission or one of many espionage 
flights ? 

Was it in violation of international law? 

What did such flights accomplish? 

Why hadn’t the Russians objected to such flights earlier? 

Should the flights be continued or terminated? 

Since Russia had now captured one of the U-2 planes and 
all of its equipment, the U. S. Government felt justified in 
telling the inside facts on this rather ingenious American de- 
fense device which had been operating over Russia and China 
for more than 4 years. The May 1 flight was one of more than 
200 which had been mapping offensive war preparations of 
the USSR. It was revealed that the U-2’s had been ordered 
aloft in 1956 when the U.S. had first learned that the Com- 
munist leaders had officially adopted a mammoth “sneak 
attack” plan as part of their over-all strategy. The planes had 
been flying over Russia at an altitude of between 12 and 14 
miles — far out of reach of any jets or rockets which the Rus- 
sians possessed. 

Was this illegal? Since Russia had refused to negotiate 
any international law on air space, these flights were not 
illegal. Ernest K. Lindley summarized the views of Secre- 
tary of State Christian Herter : “The altitude above the earth 
to which a nation’s sovereignty extends has never been de- 


The Naked Communist 


termined by international agreement. The traditional rule 
is said to be that a nation s sovereignty extends as high as it 
can exert effective control. By that rule, the U-2 flights were 
not illegal so long as the planes flew above the reach of Soviet 
air defenses.” 11 

Then how effective had the U-2’s been? The Defense Sec- 
retary told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee : 

“From these flights, we got information on airfields, air- 
craft, missile testing and training, special-weapon storage, 
submarine production, atomic production and aircraft de- 
ployment.” 12 

How was this achieved? The Air Force revealed that it 
was done with high precision photographic equipment which 
performed miracles. This equipment could photograph a golf 
ball from 9 miles up. In fact a published photograph of a golf 
course taken from that altitude showed the greens, cars, club 
house and players. The picture caption read : “Even golf balls 
are clearly identifiable to photo-interpreters.” 13 

But Russia and China cover such vast territories. How 
could precision photography be effective over so wide a ter- 
rain? The Air Force answered this question by revealing that 
this photographic equipment not only had high precision quali- 
ties but was also extremely comprehensive. Officials pointed 
out that 2 jets carrying these special cameras could photograph 
one third of the United States in 4 hours ! 

During Khrushchev’s verbal blast against the U-2 flights, 
he let it slip that he had known about these planes for over 
three years. Some people wondered why he had not protested 
long before. Experts pointed out that if Khrushchev had com- 
plained, it would have exploded his propaganda boasts about 
the invincible strength of Soviets defenses. He had been 
claiming that Soviet radar, jets and rockets could prevent any 
nation from successfully attacking Russia. U-2 photographs 

11 “U-2 Making the Points,” NEWSWEEK June 12, 1960, p. 38. 

12 “Arms Chief Weighs U-2 Future,” u. s. news and world report, 

June 27, 1960, p. i5. 

is “ The World’s Big Spy Game,” u. s. news and world report, May 

23, 1960, p. U7. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


had revealed that Russian defenses were wide open to massive 
retaliatory attack. It was for this reason that Khrushchev had 
waited until he finally got hold of a U-2 plane so that he could 
claim the Russians had shot it down. The Communists even 
succeeded in getting Francis Powers to testify at his Moscow 
trial that he had been shot down at 68,000 feet. But when his 
father came from America to visit him, the U-2 pilot said he 
was not shot down. This seemed to confirm Washington mil- 
itary statements that the Russians had neither jets nor rockets 
that could reach 68,000 feet. 

The question of future U-2 flights was finally settled when 
President Eisenhower agreed that there would be no more. He 
made it clear that this was not because the flights were illegal 
or unjustified but simply that the United States would soon 
have other means of staying informed about Russian bases. 
The U.S. successfully launched its first Midas satellite into 
orbit on May 23, 1960. This one carried a 3,000 pound pay- 
load of technical equipment designed to detect a missile launch- 
ing anywhere in the world. A few months later the U.S. 
launched its Samos satellite. The Samos was specifically de- 
signed to photograph Russia and China from 300 miles out 
as it made an orbital journey around the earth every 94 i/> 
minutes. Of course, from 300 miles distance, additional photo- 
graphic miracles were necessary. The Air Force revealed that 
the cameras on the Samos would photograph and identify any 
object larger than one square foot. 

The RH-i7 Incident 


An American RB-47 reconnaissance plane disappeared 
over the Berents Sea on July 1, 1960. For several days Russia 
pretended to be helping in the search for the missing plane 
and then bluntly admitted that it had been shot down. All of 
the crew were killed except two. The Russians said they were 
holding the two survivors as prisoners. 

The United States was shocked. President Eisenhower 
sent Russia one of the most indignant protests of his entire 


The Naked Communist 


career as President. Russia claimed that the plane was shot 
down because it had violated Russian territory just like the 
U-2. The United States Ambassador said this charge was an 
absolute falsehood. He pointed out that the plane had been 
under British electronic surveillance and that the United States 
was prepared to prove the RB-47 had never been closer than 
thirty miles to the Soviet border. 

On July 26, 1960, the United States demanded an impar- 
tial investigation by the United Nations to fix responsibility 
for this inexcusable and illegal attack which had resulted in 
the killing of four Americans and the kidnaping of two others. 
The request was referred to the Security Council. It was gen- 
erally agreed that a UN investigation should be held. How 
else could the UN Charter be enforced unless investigations 
of alleged violations were conducted ? But there was no investi- 
gation by the UN. Russia vetoed it! 

The Italian representative then moved that the Interna- 
tional Red Cross be allowed to interview the two American 
survivors. Russia vetoed that, too. 

Most Americans missed the ugly significance of this entire 
UN fiasco. Once more Russia had violated the first two articles 
of the UN charter and gotten away with it. There were no 
particular protests from the press or the public. There was 
no sweeping demand that Russia be expelled. There was 
no stirring demand that the whole UN structure be completely 
re-examined. Across the country, school children continued 
to be told that the UN was the only hope for peace and justice 
among men. 


The Space Race 

In October, 1957, Russia electrified the world with her 
first Sputnik. Built on plans stolen from the United States 
after World War II, Sputnik I, with a payload weighing 184 
pounds, was successfully launched into orbit October 4th. 

Immediately the United States went into “panic produc- 
tion” to catch up. However, U.S. missile experts insisted on a 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


broad range of experimental effort rather than single-focus 
crash programs such as the Russians seemed to be following. 
Long range, the American approach soon began to pay off. 
Russia continued to put up bigger payloads but America 
started getting far better scientific data. Gradually the U.S. 
satellite and missile teams began forging ahead. 

By April 1, 1960, the U.S. had the highly successful Tiros 
I in orbit which circled the earth every 99 minutes at a height 
of 450 miles. This space vehicle had solar batteries which 
operated earth-controlled television cameras to transmit pic- 
tures of weather formations. This was the most successful 
picture-taking vehicle ever put into space. 

On August 11, 1960, the U.S. was the first to de-orbit a 
satellite capsule from space. This one weighed 300 pounds. 
On August 12 the U.S. put an inflated balloon into space. It 
was as high as a 10-story building and was described as the 
“first radio mirror” for a huge satellite communications net- 
work. 1960 also marked the launching of America’s first 
inter-continental ballistic missiles from submerged submarines. 
This meant that never again could Russia plan a sneak attack 
on the West because massive retaliation could be launched 
from America’s moving missile bases at sea. 

Officials revealed that future satellites would carry infra- 
red sensors capable of detecting atomic explosions and bal- 
listic missile launchings by the Communists. These also would 
be able to follow the trail of missiles in flight. America’s long- 
anticipated Midas and Samos satellites ranged into orbit dur- 
ing 1960 and early 1961. 

Payload size also gradually became important to the U.S. 
as it neared the time when a man would be put into space. A 
15-ton satellite was promised for about 1963. However, ex- 
perts promised that there would be an American in space even 
before that. 

Prodded by the unknown proportions of the Russian effort, 
American wealth and technology poured its strength into the 
space race. The score by 1961 seemed significant : 


The Naked Communist 


Space launching to date : ... 

...U.S. 32.... 

.. .RUSSIA 7 

Still in earth orbit : 

..U.S. 

16.... 

....RUSSIA 

1 

In solar orbit : 

..U.S. 

2... 

....RUSSIA 

1 

Still transmitting : 

...U.S. 

9... 

....RUSSIA 

0 

Successful moon shots : 

...U.S. 

0.... 

....RUSSIA 

1 

Recovery from orbit : 

...U.S. 

4.... 

...RUSSIA 

1 


The March of Communism in Africa 

The year 1960 saw a clear manifestation that the Com- 
munist time table of conquest for Africa was right on schedule. 
In 1953, the Communist leaders had promised themselves that 
during the 1960’s “a wave of revolution will sweep over the 
whole continent of Africa and the imperialists and coloniza- 
tionists will be quickly driven into the sea.” 14 They also made 
it clear that the agitating and provoking of the “wave of revo- 
lution” was the Communist program for the capture of Africa. 

However, by 1960, the European nations with colonies in 
Africa were already busily trying to prepare the people for 
independence and self-government by peaceful means. From 
a Communist standpoint this would have been a defeat. Red 
leaders knew that any well-ordered government of natives 
would undoubtedly resist Russian-Chinese domination. It was 
therefore decided to urge the natives to demand freedom im- 
mediately, before they had actually been prepared for self- 
government. The Communists figured that in the resulting 
chaos, they could probably take over. This is exactly what 
began to take place. 

The Tragedy in the Congo 

The 1960 chain of events in the Belgian Congo illustrated 
the devastating effect of turning self-government over to prim- 
itive people prematurely. The tragedy was compounded by 
the fact that the natives had already been promised independ- 


14 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, April 29, 195i, p. 5708. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


ence by 1964. Consequently, their uprising was not so much 
for independence as for “freedom now.” 

To see the big picture it is necessary to realize that 75 
years befoVe when the Belgians first settled the Congo, it con- 
sisted of around 120 cannibalistic tribes living on the lowest 
levels of human existence. 

By 1960 the Belgians had created vast resources of wealth 
in the geographical heart of Africa. Most of it was concen- 
trated in the province of Katanga which produced 7.5% of the 
world’s copper, 60% of its cobalt, most of the world’s supply 
of radium and large supplies of uranium and zinc. 

As with the French and British, the Belgians had hoped 
self-government could be developed among the Africans by 
having the natives learn technical skills and gradually assume 
responsibility for a stable government. Business leaders and 
investors were also willing to take the risk of a political transi- 
tion providing the new government was well managed. In this 
rather cordial setting it was agreed that Congolese independ- 
ence could be granted by 1964. The Belgians promised liberal 
loans to the newly planned government and also promised to 
keep their civil service staff working alongside the natives for 
several years until they could safely take over. 

Then Patrice Lumumba came storming back from the 
Pan-African conference chanting the current Communist 
theme : “Independence now, now, now !” Lumumba, a former 
postal clerk from Stanleyville, had been trained in the special 
Communist schools in Prague and had a brother living in Mos- 
cow. He had managed to become the head of the most left- 
wing political contingent in the Congo and, at the moment, 
enjoyed a popular following. The Belgian officials began to 
sense a threatening tone in his demands and saw the possibility 
of an Algerian type of civil war. Therefore the Government 
suddenly agreed to go ahead with the independence of the 
Congo by June 30, 1960, instead of waiting until 1964. 

The Belgians thought this would satisfy Lumumba and 
therefore the government was turned over to him on the pre- 
scribed date. But no sooner had Lumumba become Premier 
than he began a volcanic tirade against “the whites” in general 


The Naked Communist 


and “the Belgians” in particular. The whole structure of 
“peaceful transition” went out the political window overnight. 

The Congolese troops caught the spirit which Lumumba 
had exhibited and promptly mutinied against their white offi- 
cers. Soon they became a roaring mob. They swept through 
the white sections of the principal cities beating, robbing and 
raping. As violence spread, the whites fled the Congo in terror. 
Some congregated temporarily in embassies, some rushed to 
the airports. At Leopoldville, doctors estimated that at least 
one out of every four women escaping to the airport had been 
raped, some of them a dozen times. 

The evacuation of the whites left the Congo almost devoid 
of government, schools, hospitals, or business services. The 
native literacy rate was one of the highest in Africa, but in 
all of the Congo there was not one native engineer or doctor 
and only a few college graduates. 

To avoid total collapse and to protect the fleeing whites, 
the Belgian government brought in paratroopers. Lumumba, 
however, treated them as enemies and demanded that UN 
troops be flown in. No sooner had the forces begun to 
arrive than Lumumba turned against them and invited 
Khrushchev to send strong Communist forces to take over the 
entire Congo. Soon Communist planes, trucks, equipment, 
technicians and propagandists were arriving. Lumumba began 
collectivizing the land and assembling an army to drive out 
both the UN and the Belgian troops. He also began acting like 
a fully disciplined Communist dictator by committing genocide 
against his own people. In the Kasai province, Lumumba’s 
troops wiped out the Balubas tribe while Lumumba’s cousin, 
Surete Chief Omonombe, personally directed the massacre of 
the Bakwanga tribe. Rescuers were prevented from bringing 
out women, children or the wounded. 15 

In spite of all this, the UN Secretariat continued to sup- 
port Lumumba as the legitimate head of the government. 

But this was too much for the Congolese. They felt they 
had been betrayed. On September 5th, President Joseph 


15 PARIS REPORT OF HILAIRE DU BERRIER, Sept., 1960, p. 1. 


Communism Under Khrushchev 


Kasavubu told the world he was ousting Lumumba as Premier. 
The very same day Lumumba’s own troops turned bitterly 
against him. The Army Chief, Joseph Mobutu, clapped the 
blustering Lumumba in jail and told his Communist followers 
to get out of the Congo immediately. 

All of this looked like a healthy improvement to most 
people, but to the amazement of both Congolese and outside 
observers, Dag Hammarskjold continued to use his office as 
UN Secretary General to intercede for Lumumba. Responsible 
Congolese like Premier Moise Tshombe of Katanga began ask- 
ing whose side Dag Hammarskjold was on! 

In the beginning Dag Hammarskj olds’ personal repre- 
sentative in the Congo had been Dr. Ralph Bunche, an Ameri- 
can Negro serving as Under Secretary of the UN. But when 
Bunche failed in his attempt to get the Congolese to accept 
the Communist-dominated regime of Patrice Lumumba, he 
was replaced. The replacement turned out to be a UN official 
named Rajeshwar Dayal of India. Dayal had functioned for 
only a short time when President Kasavubu became equally 
alarmed with his policies. By January, 1961, Kasavubu had 
written two letters to Dag Hammarskjold begging the UN to 
remove Dayal because of his strong “partiality.” 

During the latter part of 1960 and the early part of 1961, 
the violence of Lumumba’s forces continued to spread havoc 
in the central and northern sections of the Congo. Press 
dispatches told of the raping of nuns and other atrocities 
against whites. Then in early February, 1961, it was sud- 
denly announced that Lumumba had escaped from Katanga 
and was believed to be heading back toward the central 
Congo to join his forces. Because Lumumba was the prin- 
cipal voice for both Communism and violence the Premier 
of the Katanga Province put a high price on Lumumba’s 
head. A few days later it was announced that Lumumba 
had been caught and killed by Congolese natives. 

Immediately a cry of outrage came rumbling forth from 
Moscow and a storm of protest emanated from the UN. Pres- 
ident Kasavubu and Moise Tshombe could not understand why 


The Naked Communist 


UN Secretary, Dag Hammarskjold, insisted on being so sen- 
timentally concerned over Lumumba after the terrible blood 
bath he had inflicted on the Congo. 

The Congolese were also amazed when Hammarskjold 
tried to force President Kasavubu to set up a Communist 
coalition government. This was exactly the way each of the 
East European nations had been trapped into becoming Soviet 
satellites. Tshombe was further outraged when UN officials 
tried to force him to terminate all relations with the Belgians 
and discharge his Belgian advisors. Tshombe accused Dag 
Hammarskjold of trying to drive out the Belgians so a UN 
power grab could be achieved. This actually took place in 
September, 1961. Dag Hammarskjold engineered an attack 
on Katanga with UN troops which temporarily forced 
Tshombe from the government. Tshombe was replaced by 
the right hand man of Communist leader, Antoine Gizenga. 

However, Tshombe rallied the people under the battle cry 
of “Liberty or Death !” and the resistance to the UN conquest 
began. It was then that Dag Hammarskjold flew to Africa to 
negotiate a cease-fire before the UN-sponsored regime was 
overthrown. Enroute to Katanga, the UN plane crashed and 
Dag Hammarskjold was killed. In Washington, D. C., Senator 
Thomas A. Dodd told the U. S. Senate that Hammarskjold’s 
campaign had been turning the whole Congo into a Com- 
munist camp. He charged that the State Department had 
made a monumental blunder in using American money to 
back the UN conquest of the Congo. 1 ' 1 

During all of this excitement many Americans thought 
the UN was actually trying to protect the Congo from a 
Communist take-over. They drew this conclusion from the 
fact that Khrushchev had been violently criticizing Hammar- 
skjold’s program in the Congo. Now it appeared that the 
fight between Khrushchev and Hammarskjold was not on 
the issue of a Communist take-over since they had both been 
pushing for one. Their dispute was to determine who would 
control the Communist regime once it was in power. 


16 The four speeches of Senator Thomas A. Dodd have been published 
in a pamphlet by the Government Printing Office. It is called the 
CRISIS IN THE CONGO (1961). 



XI 

The Communist Conquest of Cuba 

Now we turn our attention to Cuba. 

During 1960, while the world was focusing attention on 
events in the Congo, a far more serious development was 
taking place just 90 miles from the shores of the United 
States. For many months shocked Americans had been watch- 
ing Fidel Castro completely destroy his pretended image as 
the “George Washington of Cuba” and triumphantly portray 
himself in his true role as a hard-core Communist conspirator. 

Everything Lumumba would have done in the Congo, 
Castro actually accomplished in Cuba: drumhead justice, mass 
executions, confiscation of industry, collectivization of the 
land, suspension of civil rights, suspension of democratic proc- 
esses, alliances with the Iron Curtain. All these became the 
trade marks of the Castro regime. 

To millions of Americans this was bitterly disappointing. 
They had read Herbert Matthews’ pro-Castro articles in the 
New York Times and watched prominent TV personalities 
portray Castro as the savior of Cuba. 


The Naked Communist 


As a matter of research, however, there was no real 
excuse for missing Fidel Castro’s Communist connections. 
For years he had been clearly identified with their leaders, 
their insurrections, their ideology and their plans. And even 
if all of this evidence had been absent, the official records 
of the Havana and Bogota police departments should have 
told the most casual observer that Fidel Castro was certainly 
no pillar of hope for Cuba. Even before he graduated from 
law school his checkerboard career included such crimes as 
assault with a deadly weapon, arson, insurrection and murder. 


Who Is Fidel Castro? 

Fidel Castro is one of five illegitimate children born to a 
servant woman on the sugar plantation of Fidel’s wealthy 
father, Angel Castro. 1 Biographers point out that his early 
upbringing was not particularly conducive to promoting the 
best qualities in a human personality. When Fidel was sent 
to secondary school he turned out to be a mediocre student 
with an aggressive, ambitious and rebellious nature. He was 
not well liked at the school and to overcome his lack of 
popularity he decided to impress the students by mounting a 
bicycle and riding it full tilt into a high stone wall. This 
accident left him unconscious for days. Some authorities 
have wondered if he really ever recovered. At 16 he obtained 
a gun and tried to kill a teacher because of an argument over 
poor grades. 

By the time Castro was 19, he had determined to become 
a lawyer. To achieve this his father sent him to the University 
of Havana. Almost immediately, however, he identified him- 
self with the most radical element on campus and joined a 
group of beatniks who prided themselves in being unshaven 
and unclean. Castro is still remembered at the University 
of Havana by his nickname of “Bola de Churre” — Ball of 
Dirty Grease. 


1 Thus far the best political history on Fidel Castro is “ked star 
over CUBA,” by ex-Communist Nathaniel Weyl, Devin-Adair, 1960. 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


Castro told Diaz Balart (who later became his brother- 
in-law) that he intended to become studentbody president and 
then use his prestige to agitate the students into a revolu- 
tionary force which would ultimately make him the political 
leader of Cuba. But his jealous ambition did not make him 
studentbody president. Instead, it led him to engineer his first 
attempt at murder in 1947. 

The victim was Leonel Gomez, the popular studentbody 
president of Havana High School #1. For “political reasons” 
Castro shot him through the chest with intent to kill. For- 
tunately the boy recovered. Castro, however, expected him 
to die and fled from the city to join a Communist-directed 
expedition which was training to invade the Dominican Re- 
public and overthrow Trujillo. Before the expedition was 
launched Castro heard that Gomez had recovered and there- 
fore felt it was safe to return to the University. 

Castro’s Second Attempt at Murder 
Is Successful 

By 1948 Castro had gained considerable confidence in 
his own political prospects and was determined that nothing 
should stand in the way. He had made himself the head of 
a University terrorist organization and on February 22, 1948, 
he used machineguns to kill the ex-President of the Univer- 
sity Student Federation and a friend named Carlos Pucho 
Samper. Two others were wounded. Castro was arrested for 
this murder but the investigation had not been thorough and 
he was able to get released. It is also suspected that the judge 
was influenced by the fact that one of Castro’s confederates 
was the nephew of the Cuban President. 

A short time after this he left for Bogota, Columbia. 
Castro’s student activities had brought him to the attention 
of Soviet agents who were looking for young firebrands to 
lead out in the subversion of Latin American countries. Castro 
was ordered to go to Bogota and take Rafael del Pino with 


The Naked Communist 


him. In view of his recent brush with the law it seemed an 
excellent time to be taking a trip. 

Castro as a Soviet Agent in the Bogota Riots 

In April, 1948, the eyes of the world were watching 
Bogota, Colombia, where the Ninth Inter- American Confer- 
ence was to be held. It was under the direction of U. S. 
Secretary of State, George C. Marshall. This occasion was 
chosen by the Soviet strategists to stage a Communist-directed 
insurrection. It was to unseat the conservative government 
of Colombia and break up the Inter-American Conference. 

Alberto Nino, Security Chief of Colombia, published a 
book in 1949 on the insurrection. He has much to say about 
Fidel Castro. Nino describes how Castro and Rafael del Pino 
were put under surveillance the moment they arrived at the 
airport: “These two men came as replacements for two 
Russian agents stationed in Cuba, whose plans were known 
and who were expected by the Colombian police. Instead 
these two came. . . . Before the 9th of April, a telegram was 
taken from them announcing the arrival of one of the 
Russians.” 2 

Nino and his men found that the planned insurrection was 
not being led by the Communist Party of Colombia but by a 
group of “international Communists” who worked out of the 
Soviet legation in Bogota. There were nine of these inter- 
national Communists who fronted for the Soviet apparatus. 
Fidel Castro and Rafael del Pino were two of the nine. 

When the insurrection struck it was triggered by having 
Communist agents kill Dr. Jorge Gaitan, the most popular 
political leader in Colombia. Communist handbills, printed in 
advance, blamed the murder on the Government and urged the 
people to avenge themselves by sacking the city. Within an 
hour Bogota was converted into a holocaust of violence and 
flaming devastation. 

Nino found that the Soviet apparatus had arranged to 


2 Nino, Alberto, “antecentes y secretos del 9 de abril,” Editorial 
Pax, Bogota, 19 ! t 9, p. 77. 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


have a crew move through the city ahead of the mob smashing 
off locks and opening stores and warehouses. After the mob 
had looted the buildings, another crew went through spraying 
gasoline on floors and walls. The last stage was to have 
trained arsonists methodically burn these structures which 
ultimately gutted the center of the city. 

When it was all over the “destruction of the civic center 
was complete.” The Palace of Justice which contained most 
of the civil and criminal records was demolished to its founda- 
tions. Colleges, churches, stores and other public buildings 
were burned. Altogether 136 major buildings were destroyed 
representing a loss of more than $21,000,000. After the bat- 
tles between the police and the mobs had subsided more than 
1,000 corpses were left lying in the streets. 

Some of Castro’s biographers have tried to gloss over 
Castro’s complicity in this terrible destruction but the files of 
the Bogota police state that detectives secured a “carnet, 
which the office of Detectives now has in its possession, with 
a photograph of the two Cubans, identifying them as first- 
grade agents of the Third Front of the USSR in South 
America.” 3 

It was further discovered that Castro and del Pino were 
apparently the ones assigned to arrange the murder of Jorge 
Gaitan. Their activities became so completely exposed that 
President Perez went on a nationwide broadcast to denounce 
the two Cubans as “Communist leaders in the insurrection.” 

When it became obvious that the insurrection had failed, 
Castro and del Pino left quickly for Cuba. 

Castro Commits His Third Murder 

Castro had barely returned, however, when he learned 
that Sgt. Fernandez Caral of the Havana Police had been care- 
fully investigating the machinegun murders which occurred 
earlier in the year and now had positive evidence that Castro 
was responsible. Castro immediately rounded up his associ- 

3 Weyl, Nathaniel, “red star over Cuba,” p. S3. 


The Naked Communist 


ates and when they saw an opportunity, they killed Caral on 
July 4, 1948. A police net was thrown out over the city. That 
same day Fidel Castro was arrested and charged with the 
murder. But now the police had a chance to see what kind of 
influence Castro possessed. They soon discovered that the 
witnesses to the murder were so intimidated by fear of re- 
prisal from Castro’s terrorist organization that none of them 
would testify. Once again the authorities were forced to 
release Castro and he promptly scurried away into hiding. 

From this point on, Castro moved through the seething 
revolutionary underground of Cuba as a force to be reckoned 
with. 

By 1948 the sensational disclosures of Whittaker Chamb- 
ers, Elizabeth Bentley and a host of defected American 
Communists had exposed Russia’s world-wide conspiracy to 
Sovietize all humanity. As a result, a strong wave of anti-Com- 
munist sentiment was rising everywhere. Up and down the 
Western hemisphere Communists were being instructed to 
run for cover and do their work through “fronts.” In Cuba, 
Fidel Castro decided to ally himself with the Orthodox Party 
which was a reform movement led by Eddie Chibas. Eddie 
Chibas soon detected something wrong with Castro and warned 
his associates that Castro was not only Communistic but had 
propensities for violent revolution of the gangster variety. 
This warning blocked Castro from gaining further power in 
the leadership of the party but he still was allowed to remain 
a member. 


The Batista Regime in Cuba 

By 1952 it was time for another general election, and, as 
usual, revolutionary activity was threatening on every hand. 
Candidates were being physically attacked and some blood had 
been spilled. In the Cuban Army it was beginning to get 
around that some of the political factions were thinking of 
using the Army to seize power and restore order. General 
Fulgencio Batista suddenly decided to seize Cuba’s political 
reigns and restore order himself. 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


In order to evaluate the Batista coup it is necessary to 
appreciate that never for any appreciable time since Cuba won 
her independence has she enjoyed genuine democracy or stable 
self-government. Her political history has been a tragic com- 
posite of illegal elections, assassinations, inefficiency in gov- 
ernment, graft, nepotism, intimidation and dictatorships. Al- 
though popular elections have been held, these have nearly 
always been so corruptly and fraudulently conducted that it 
was never certain whether the “elected” officials were actually 
the people’s choice. Defeated candidates often became the 
leaders of revolutionary parties seeking to seize control. 
This would lead to dictatorial reprisal by the party in power, 
and thus the political pendulum would swing between the 
“ins” and the “outs” with popular uprisings and military sup- 
pressions following each other in quick succession. 

As far as General Batista was concerned, 1952 was not 
the first time he had used the Army to seize power and estab- 
lish order in Cuba. Back in 1933-34 he had quelled civil strife 
long enough to have a new president put in office; but when 
the people were not satisfied with this or any other candidate 
for president, he finally had himself elected in 1940. A new 
constitution was adopted in 1940, but when the general election 
was held in 1944, Batista’s candidate was defeated. The Ba- 
tista regime was followed by two extremely corrupt, graft- 
ridden administrations which once more destroyed confidence 
in the democratic processes. By 1952 these politicians were 
also destroying the stability of Cuba’s economy. Batista was 
a candidate for president himself but felt the elections would 
be a fraud and civil war would result ; therefore he considered 
the circumstances sufficiently critical to justify his taking 
over again and re-establishing a temporary military govern- 
ment. 

There was a cry of outrage both in the United States and 
Cuba as Batista suspended the elections and dissolved the con- 
gress. Nevertheless, he forged ahead with a four-pronged 
program: 1 — stabilizing Cuba’s economy through diversified 
agriculture and accelerated industrial development ; 2 — 
strengthening economic and political ties with the United 


The Naked Communist 


States ; 3 — resisting Communism, and 4 — raising the Cuban 
standard of living. He also promised the U. S. Ambassador 
that free elections would be held no later than 1958. 

By 1957 the International Monetary Fund ranked Cuba 
fourth among the 20 Latin American Republics in per capita 
income. Although it was only one sixth as high as the United 
States, it was 90% as high as Italy, far higher than Japan, 
and six times higher than India. The U. S. Department of 
Commerce reported : “The Cuban national income has reached 
levels which give the Cuban people one of the highest stand- 
ards of living in Latin America.” 4 

Batista’s biographers agree that the General was not the 
usual Latin American “army strong man,” but was actually 
very pro-labor and tried to persuade the people that he wanted 
to carry out policies which would be popular rather than dicta- 
torial. It soon became apparent that Batista’s policies were 
making a highly profitable tourist mecca out of Cuba and 
attracting vast quantities of American capital for industrial 
development. It also became apparent that Cuba was gradual- 
ly changing from a strait- jacket, sugar-cane culture to a better 
balanced industrial-agriculture-tourist economy. Wages went 
up from 10 to 30% and many Cuban workers were covered 
with health, accident and medical insurance for the first time. 
Between 1950 and 1958 the overall national income jumped 
22%. This is after deducting 10% for rising living costs. 

This, then, was the promising development of Cuba which 
was taking place at the time Batista was overthrown. 

Politically, Batista’s administration was typical of Cuba’s 
past. The Batista regime indulged itself in certain quantities 
of graft; when there were armed insurrections, Batista met 
violence with violence; when there were minority uprisings 
he suspended civil rights and established full military control. 
Nevertheless he insisted that once conditions were stabilized, 
he would submit himself to the people in a popular election 
and would be willing to stand by the results just as he had 
done in 1944. His opponents, particularly Fidel Castro, jeered 


4 U. S. Department of Commerce Report, “investments in CUBA.” 

p. 18i. 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


at such promises and accused Batista of being opposed to con- 
stitutional government. The record shows that several times 
when Batista tried to slacken the reigns of control there were 
immediate outbursts of violence and he would therefore tighten 
them again. 

But it was during the Castro Revolution that Batista’s 
political sincerity was actually demonstrated. He announced 
that in accordance with his previous commitment there would 
be a general election June 1, 1958. He invited Castro to restore 
peace so that the will of the people could be determined. 

Castro responded with a bloodthirsty manifesto in which 
he declared that as of April 5, 1958, any person who remained 
in an office of trust in the executive branch of the government 
would be “considered guilty of treason.” He said candidates 
for the elections must withdraw immediately or suffer “ten 
years imprisonment to the death sentence.” He authorized 
his revolutionary militia in the towns and cities to shoot down 
candidates summarily. 

Responsible Cubans such as Dr. Marquez Sterling made 
contact with Castro in his mountain retreat and pleaded with 
the revolutionary leader to stop the bloodshed and allow the 
elections. Castro arrogantly turned him down. There would 
be no elections. 

During the emotional white heat of the revolution many 
Americans missed the highly significant overtures which Ba- 
tista was making. As it turned out, these might have made 
the difference in saving Cuba from the Communist conquest 
which Castro was planning. 

Earlier, U. S. Ambassador Arthur Gardner had been 
removed because he urged support of Batista until Cuba’s 
problems could be settled at the polls. He was replaced by 
Ambassador Earl Smith who soon received a horrified State 
Department stare when he tried to put over the point that 
Castro was obviously leading Cuba and the United States into 
a Soviet-built Communist trap. 

These shocked State Department “experts” reflected their 
complete disdain for their Ambassador’s advice by deliberately 


The Naked Communist 


246 engineering a tight arms embargo against Batista. Then they 
went further. To completely assure Batista’s defeat they pro- 
moted an agreement among the Central and South American 
republics that they would not sell arms to Batista either. The 
results were inevitable. 

In desperation, Batista tried to buy 15 unarmed training 
planes from the United States. It was finally agreed that this 
would be satisfactory. Batista paid for them in advance. 
Then Castro ordered Raul to launch a project specifically de- 
signed to intimidate and humiliate the United States. Raul 
kidnapped 30 U. S. Marines and sailors, 17 American civilians 
and 3 Canadians. Threats against the lives of these hostages 
were used to force the United States to cancel the shipment 
of training planes to Batista. The experts in the State Depart- 
ment meekly capitulated ! 

Some American citizens were bold enough to suggest that 
if Teddy Roosevelt had been alive he would have taken the 
U. S. Marine Corps and landed in the middle of Castro’s moun- 
tain retreat with such an earthshaking velocity that the Cuban 
tyrant would have gladly released the Americans — and without 
any price. 


The Castro Coup D’Etat 

When Batista first took over in 1952, Fidel Castro had 
immediately projected himself into the front lines of oppo- 
sition. As indicated previously, Castro had been working 
behind the facade of the Orthodox Party, but after the Batista 
Coup he insisted that this organization include the Com- 
munist Party and set up a “popular front” against Batista. 
The Orthodox Party leaders refused to do this. Castro 
promptly bolted the party and said he would form his own 
movement. 

It was only a short time after this — July 26, 1953 — that 
he made his disastrous attack on the Army barracks at San- 
tiago. This turned into a real tragedy for the men in the 
barracks hospital (who were cut to pieces by Castro’s raiders) 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


and also for Castro’s men. They were met with overwhelming 
odds and captured or killed. Survivors were subjected to tor- 
ture and eventual death in retaliation for their attack on the 
wards in the hospital. Thus the “26th of July Movement” 
was born. 

Castro had managed to assign himself to a less dangerous 
post in the 26th of July attack and when he saw the assault 
was failing he fled, shouting, “Every man for himself!” His 
brother Raul also escaped. Later both of the Castro brothers 
were captured and sentenced to prison. Fidel was Sentenced 
to 15 years and Raul to 13. However, both of them served 
only 22 months because after Batista had put down the at- 
tempted insurrection he commuted their sentences. 

For this gesture of political generosity by Batista, the 
Castro brothers displayed only contempt. During July, 1955, 
they left Cuba declaring that they would organize an 
invasion force and soon return to pull down Batista and 
“liberate” Cuba. 

The headquarters for this invasion movement was estab- 
lished near Mexico City. All kinds of people flocked there to 
support Castro’s so-called liberation of Cuba. Some were 
political enemies of Batista, some were opportunists, many 
were sincere liberals. But just as with Lumumba in Africa, 
sinister hard-core Communist personalities immediately moved 
in close to provide the “guiding hand.” Castro’s chief of staff 
turned out to be Dr. Ernesto “Che” Guevara, an Argentinian 
Communist assigned to work with Castro by the Soviet ap- 
paratus called “Asistencia Tecnica.” Raul Castro had received 
considerable training during a recent trip to Prague, Moscow 
and Red China. He was therefore made commander of Cas- 
tro’s army. Other trained Communists moved deftly into 
every phase of the program. 

But in spite of all the training, intrigue and planning, the 
famous “Invasion of Cuba” by Castro’s forces turned out to 
be a real fiasco. Castro’s total strength was a mere handful of 
only 82 men who clambored aboard a leaky yacht on November 
25, 1956, and set out to sea. The Captain of the yacht was Hipo- 
lito Castillo, well known strategist of the Soviet organization 


The Naked Communist 


for the subversion of Latin America. The sluggish yacht was 
slow in reaching Cuba and when the men waded ashore to 
make their heroic invasion they were cut to pieces with gun- 
fire. Most of them were captured or killed. Castro managed 
to escape into the hills and eventually work his way up into 
the 8,000 foot heights of the Sierra Maestra. He arrived there 
with only a handful of his original force. “Che” Guevara took 
over and began using propaganda and tactical strategy to 
dominate the immediate area and gradually rally others to the 
cause — especially young Cubans “full of life, ideals and faith.” 
Thus the strange forces of revolutionary fire began to be built 
and soon civil war was reaching out across Cuba. 

Two major factors led to the final success of Castro’s 
revolution. One was centered in the Soviet Union and the 
other was centered in the United States. 

Raul Castro who had previously been behind the Iron 
Curtain made several trips to Russia and Czechoslovakia to 
negotiate for arms and finances. The arms arrived by sub- 
marine, the money came through by couriers. During the last 
months of the revolution, observers were amazed at the quan- 
tities of Czech and Russian equipment being used by the 
Castro forces. They were equally surprised at the vast sup- 
plies of money which Castro had available — money for wages, 
food, equipment, liquor, bribery and favors. 

Batista, on the other hand, suddenly found himself at the 
other end of the horn. Because of his pro-U. S. policies he 
had assumed that when the struggle for Cuba became critical 
he would be able to rely on the United States to sell him arms 
and supplies. To his amazement he discovered that his request 
for permission to buy arms in the U. S. fell on deaf ears. 
What he had not realized was that Herbert Matthews, Edward 
Murrow, Ed Sullivan, Ruby Phillips, Jules Dubois and a multi- 
tude of other writers and opinion makers had been eulogizing 
Castro and castigating Batista. In Congress, Senator Wayne 
Morse, Representative Charles 0. Porter and Representative 
Adam Clayton Powell had thrown their combined weight be- 
hind the Castro cause. All this “Robin Hood” propaganda 
definitely had its effect. 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


At the same time Assistant Secretary of State Roy Ru- 
bottom and Caribbean Director William Wieland — the two 
persons who were supposed to know what was going on — 
blandly assured all inquirers that Fidel Castro was the hope 
of Cuba and had no Communist taint whatever. As late as 
June, 1959 (and that was extremely late), Congressman Port- 
er was assuring his colleagues: “No one in the State Depart- 
ment believes Castro is a Communist, or a Communist 
sympathizer, nor does any other responsible person who wants 
to get his facts straight.” 5 

Of course, as time marched on toward Cuba’s inexorable 
doom, the course of history embarrassed the Congressman 
and also the State Department. In the closing months of the 
conflict American policies followed blind alleys which authori- 
ties have since attributed to either “stupidity, incompetence, 
or worse.” 


The Communist Take-Over 

It was January 1, 1959, that Fidel Castro became the 
political steward of a dazed, war-weary Cuba. Batista had 
fled. All opposition was crushed. In many circles of Ameri- 
can liberals and confused newspaper readers there was a great 
huzza as though liberty and constitutional government had 
come to Cuba at last. 

But many students of international problems saw omin- 
ous signs that the suffering and blood-letting for Cuba had 
barely begun. The first warnings were exultant boasts from 
the Communist press that “they” had won. In Moscow, 
Pravda pointed out that from the very beginning of the Cast- 
ro movement “our party considered it its first duty to aid the 
rebels, giving them the correct orientation and the support 
of the popular masses. The party headed the battles of the 
peasants for land and thereby increased its authority among 
the peasantry. Our party . . . appealed to the popular masses 
to support Fidel Castro in every way. . . .” 6 


5 Weyl, Nathaniel, “red star over Cuba,” p. 157. 

6 pravda, Moscow, Feb. 29, 1960. 


The Naked Communist 


The Communist Party of Cuba also came out in the open 
to boast that they had provided an important part of the 
revolutionary action “to overthrow the bloody tyranny of 
Batista which served as the instrument of imperialistic in- 
terests and was supported by imperialism.” 7 

If General Batista read this statement he may have won- 
dered where this “imperialistic” support was supposed to have 
come from. He knew that if the Communists were accusing 
him of enjoying U. S. support they were really confused. 

As soon as Castro took over he used his revolutionary 
courts of mob justice to send over 600 persons to the firing 
squads. American liberals described the punishment as 
“harsh, but deserved.” Then he reached out and began a 
“reform” movement of typical Communist dimensions : 

Confiscation of land and settling Cuban workers on what 
turned out to be large, Soviet-type collectivized 
farms. 

Confiscation of more than a billion dollars worth of 
American industry which Castro had neither the 
technicians nor finances to operate. 

Breaking up of Cuban family life and placing medium- 
aged children in special farm communes so “the chil- 
dren will be under the influence of teachers and not 
their families 

Reorganization of the schools to serve as propaganda 
transmission belts to dispense Communist doctrine 
and the “Hate Yankee” line. 

Suspension of civil liberties and other constitutional 
guarantees. 

Elimination of free elections. 

Capture of all press, TV and radio for government propa- 
ganda purposes. 

Termination of all cultural, political and economic ties 
with the United States. 

Alliances with Russia. 


» NEW _ YORK TIMKS, April 22, 1959 “Fear of Red’s Role in Castro 
Regime Alarming Havana 


The Communist Conquest of Cuba 


Recognition of Red China. 

Trade with the Communist bloc. 

While all of this Communist machinery was being put 
into operation during 1959 and early 1960, many American 
apologists for Castro continued to insist that he was neither 
Communist nor dictatorial, just “misunderstood.” They 
snatched at every hopeful atom of news from Cuba indicating 
that Castro might be “getting more reasonable now,” or “Cas- 
tro is changing.” 

But all of these dreams of hopeful illusion were smashed 
by Castro himself when he dutifully answered the call of 
Nikita Khrushchev in the summer of 1960 and went to the 
United Nations as part of the Red Bloc “show of strength.” 
At Castro’s Harlem headquarters the two dictators warmly 
embraced each other. They were brothers and comrades. 

Now that the Iron Curtain has come rumbling down on 
little Cuba perhaps some Americans occasionally reflect on 
the glowing description of Castro which Herbert Matthews 
wrote for the New York Times in 1957 : “Castro,” he said, “has 
strong ideas of liberty, democracy, social justice, the need to 
restore the constitution, to hold elections.” 

Other Americans who chose the wrong side have since 
said, “It is all so unfortunate. Perhaps it was inevitable.” 

This last statement has a familiar ring. This is precisely 
the theme which Dean Acheson put in his White Paper when 
he tried to explain why we lost China. He excused it as “in- 
evitable.” But the Wedemeyer Report revealed that China 
was also lost because of stupidity, incompetence or worse. 
China was lost when the State Department promoted an arms 
embargo against this long-standing U.S. ally at a time when 
she was fighting for her very existence. The same kind of 
thinking put the arms embargo on Batista. Both were lost. 
Both were casualties of Communism. 

All of this led former Ambassador Gardner to remark 
sadly : 

“We could have prevented it all and we didn’t. If we’d 


The Naked Communist 


252 carried out normal relations with Batista, just carried out our 
contracts, he (Batista) would have got out as scheduled, come 
to live in Florida, and been replaced by an ideal candidate.” 

“A pro-Batista man?” Gardner was asked. 

“No, Marquez Sterling, a doctor, whom everybody loved, 
was Batista’s opponent. Ironically, although against Batista, 
he had to flee Cuba because of Castro.” 8 

Events during 1961 demonstrated that the United States 
was still not giving the Cuban situation sufficient attention. 
None of the tragic errors of the past were any worse than the 
fatal blunder which occurred on April 17, 1961, when an 
abortive invasion of Cuba was attempted at the Bay of Pigs 
under circumstances which doomed it to failure before the 
attack was even launched. 

Badly organized, poorly equipped, and carrying the sag- 
ging prestige of the United States with it, a little band of less 
than 1400 Cubans landed from antiquated ships to spark an 
“uprising against Castro.” Castro was waiting for them with 
Soviet tanks, jet planes and Soviet guns. When the shoot- 
ing was over the “invaders” were captured in a body. Com- 
munist propaganda machinery all over the world went into a 
hysteria of screaming headlines against American imperial- 
ism. “A first-class disaster for U. S. prestige” wailed the free 
world press. 

In the panic atmosphere which followed, Castro facetious- 
ly said he might trade tractors for the prisoners. Imme- 
diately misguided U. S. liberals began collecting money for 
tractors to pay off Castro’s blackmail demand. Castro was 
so pleased to see citizens from the most powerful nation in the 
world cowering at his feet that he gleefully tantalized the 
negotiators by boosting his demands. As should have been 
expected, the negotiations came to nothing. 

Responsible Americans began to demand a halt to all this 
ridiculous pampering of a Soviet puppet. Serious political 
leaders began to set down the plans for a long-range strategy 
which would eventually liberate the beleaguered people of 
Cuba. 


Weyl, Nathaniel, “red star over Cuba,” p. ISO. 



XII 

The Future Task 


In this study we have made no attempt to cover up the blun- 
ders of the past which free men have made in dealing with 
Communism. In fact, all of these mistakes may be counted 
a benefit if we have learned a lesson from each of them. 
Nevertheless, we certainly would be guilty of the “decadent 
stupidity” which the Communists attribute to us if we allowed 
ourselves to repeat these mistakes in the future. 

In this chapter we shall deal with the task at hand. To 
appreciate the problem we shall first discuss the progress 
which the Communists have made under their Timetable of 
Conquest. Then we shall deal with the current line of Com- 
munist strategy. Finally we shall describe some of the most 
important things which must be done to win. 

The Communist Timetable of Conquest 


To head off an enemy it is first necessary to know where 
the enemy wants to go. The Communists have made no 



The Naked Communist 


254 secret about this. Their plan first of all is to take Asia, then 
Africa, next Europe and finally America. Although this plan 
of conquest has been in Communist literature for several 
decades, it was vigorously restated in 1953 when Red leaders 
decided to set up a timetable of conquest for the entire world 
and then take it continent by continent. Total conquest is to 
be completed by around 1973. Fortunately American military 
intelligence captured this timetable at the close of the Korean 
War and Senator William Knowland placed it in the Con- 
gressional Record under date of April 29, 1954, page 5708. 

Although the timetable is too lengthy to quote in its -en- 
tirety, selected statements are being presented with comments 
so the student may know what progress the Communists 
have made in their plans to take over the world. 

“We have to, until we are certain of victory, take a course 
which will not lead to war.” 

Official Communist strategy is to press for advan- 
tages on all fronts but to back down in the face of major 
military resistance. This will continue to be their policy 
unless they could be certain of sudden victory by a sneak 
attack which would wipe out all U.S. capacity to retaliate. 
U.S. success during 1960 in launching a Polaris missile 
from a submerged submarine made Soviet sneak attack 
plans obsolete. A Red attack would bring devastating re- 
taliation from these constantly moving missile bases 
which now will be roaming the seas. For the present, 
Red policy will therefore have to be “a course which will 
not lead to war.” 

“Britain must be placated by being convinced that . . . 
the Communists and the capitalist countries can live in peace.” 

Peaceful coexistence was not only sold to the people 
of Britain but to Americans as well. Coexistence means 
to accept Communism as a permanent fixture in the earth; 
to write off as past history the conquest of the satellite 
nations; to placate Communist demands so as to avoid 
crises and international tensions. 


The Future Task 


“Opportunities for trade will have a great influence on 
the British mind.” 

This worked even better than the Red leaders 
planned. Today not only Britain but the U.S. and 37 
other members of the Western bloc have succumbed to 
the lure of trade with the Sino-Soviet bloc. 

“In the case of France . . . she must be made to feel a 
sense of greater security in cooperating with us.” 

After World War II, Red forces in France made the 
Communist party the largest in the country. Before De- 
Gaulle’s seizure of power in 1958, Red influence had 
helped to carry France to the brink of bankruptcy, an- 
archy and civil war. 

“Japan must be convinced that rearmament endangers 
her national security and that . . . the American forces dis- 
tributed all over the world cannot spare sufficient strength 
for the defense of Japan.” 

This was the kind of Communist agitation which 
produced the 1960 Japanese riots and prevented Presi- 
dent Eisenhower from visiting Japan. 

“Her (Japan’s) desire for trade will offer great possibili- 
ties for steering Japan away from the United States.” 

By 1960 Japan had regained her position as fifth 
in world trade. The U.S. steered Japan away from the 
Sino-Soviet bloc by buying 23% of her exports and pro- 
viding 3^.8% of her imports. 

“By 1960 China’s military, economic and industrial power 
will be so developed that with a mere show of force bj the 
Soviet Union and China, the ruling clique of Japan will capitu- 
late.” 

This did not occur. Japan, with U.S. help, became 
strong while China floundered under Communist disci- 


The Naked Communist 


pline and headed for widespread famine and economic 
collapse. 

“The United States must be isolated by all possible 
means.” 

This Communist project was making alarming prog- 
ress by 1960. Anti-U. S. propaganda all over the world 
had created the image of the “ugly American.’’ And this 
in spite of 50 billions in foreign aid. Red expansion in 
Asia, Africa, Cuba, Central America and South America 
has begun to awaken Americans to the real threat of pos- 
sible isolation. 

“Whether we can prevent the United States from start- 
ing the war (to defend her rights and liberties) depends upon 
how much success we have in isolating her and how effective 
is our peace offensive.” 

This clearly reflects the perfidy of Red propaganda 
to use “peace" as a means of paralyzing U ■ S. resistance 
as the Communists gradually take over. Here we see the 
Red definition of “peaceful coexistence." It means 
“peaceful surrender.” 

“In the case of India, only peaceful means should be 
adopted. Any employment of force will alienate ourselves 
from the Arabic countries and Africa, because India is con- 
sidered to be our friend.” 

This plan to betray India through peaceful conquest 
is definitely on the march. Nehru claims neutrality but 
is a trained Marxist-socialist who has consistently lined 
up with the Red leaders on most major issues. In the 
hour of his downfall, he will no doubt ask the Western 
nations to save him. 

“After India has been won over, the problems of the 
Philippines and Arabic countries can be easily solved by eco- 
nomic cooperation . . . and coalitions. This task may be com- 
pleted by 1965.” 


The Future Task 


Already the forces of Red subversion are clearly ap- 
parent in both the Philippines and in Nasser’s Pan- 
Arabic Republic. 

“Then a wave of revolution will sweep the whole continent 
of Africa and the imperialists and the colonizationists will 
be quickly driven into the sea.” 

Even by 1960 the Communists had built the fires of 
revolutionary violence all over Africa. The colonial 
powers were trying to get the natives to follow a policy 
of “peaceful transition to independence” but many of 
them were following the Red formula : “From colonial- 
ism to chaos to Communism.” 

“With Asia and Africa disconnected with the capitalist 
countries in Europe, there will be a total economic collapse 
in Western Europe. Their capitulation will be a matter of 
course.” 

In 1960 when the Belgians relinquished the Congo, 
it created havoc in the Belgium economy. Each of the 
colonial poivers is being affected as the trade relations 
with Africa are being disrupted. Eventually the Reds 
hope to get an African-Asian strangle hold on the econ- 
omy of Europe. Every year this noose is drawing 
tighter. 

As for the United States, “crushing economic collapse 
and industrial breakdown will follow the European crisis.” 

The plunging of the U. S. into a paralyzing depres- 
sion is part of the last-stage Soviet plan of conquest for 
America. 

“Canada and South America will find themselves in the 
same hopeless and defenseless condition.” 

It is true that if the U. S. were totally isolated, in- 
timidated and subverted, the ivhole Western hemisphere 
would fall. 


The Naked Communist 


“Twenty years from now (which would be 1973) world 
revolution will be an accomplished fact!” 

Some phases of this plan of conquest have been frus- 
trated, but other phases are far ahead of expectations. 
Considered overall, the Communist Timetable of Con- 
quest is alarmingly close to being right on schedule. 

Experts on Communist strategy point out that this entire 
plan of conquest would collapse if the West awakened and 
took the initiative to start pushing Communism back on all 
fronts. They say the tragic blunder of the West has been 
its continuous willingness to coexist, to accept Communism 
as a permanent fixture in the earth, to assume that Com- 
munist conquests were unalterable, to ignore the fact that 
the Red leaders have admitted in the timetable that they 
have more reason to be frightened of military action than 
the West, and to allow free nations to be intimidated and 
bluffed into appeasing a weak enemy. 

How was this achieved? 

Importance of the Psychological War 

The biggest mistake of the West has been allowing it- 
self to drift into a state of mental stagnation, apathy and in- 
action. In some circles, motivations of patriotism, loyalty 
and the traditional dream of “freedom for all men” have been 
lying dormant or have been paralyzed by a new kind of 
strange thinking. Authorities say there is an urgent need 
for a revolutionary change in our state of mind. 

What is wrong with our “state of mind?” 

First and foremost, we have been thinking the way the 
Communists want us to think. Our founding fathers would 
be alarmed to learn how confused many of our people have 
become over such fundamental problems as coexistence, dis- 
armament, free trade, the United Nations, recognition of 
Red China, and a host of related problems. Instead of main- 


The Future Task 


taining a state of intellectual vigilance, we have taken Com- 
munist slogans as the major premises for too many of our 
conclusions. Let us go down a list of current strategy goals 
which the Communists and their fellow travelers are seeking 
to achieve. These are all part of the campaign to soften 
America for the final takeover. It should be kept in mind 
that many loyal Americans are working for these same ob- 
jectives because they are not aware that these objectives are 
designed to destroy us. 

Current Communist Goals 

1. U. S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative 
to atomic war. 

2. U. S. willingness to capitulate in preference to en- 
gaging in atomic war. 

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the 

United States would be a demonstration of moral 
strength. 

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of 
Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or 
not items could be used for war. 

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet 
Satellites. 

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Com- 
munist domination. 

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red 
China to the UN. 

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in 
spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the 
Germany question by free elections under super- 
vision of the UN. 

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because 
the U.S. has agreed to suspend tests as long as nego- 
tiations are in progress. 

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in 
the UN. 


The Naked Communist 


11. Promote the UN as the only hope for mankind. If its 
charter is rewritten, demand that it he set up as a 
one-world government with its own independent 
armed forces. ( Some Communist leaders believe the 
world can be taken over as easily by the UN as by 
Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with 
each other as they are now doing in the Congo.) 

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party. 

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths. 

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Of- 
fice. 

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the 
United States. 

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic 
American institutions by claiming their activities 
violate civil rights. 

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission 
belts for socialism and current Communist propa- 
ganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teach- 
ers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks. 

18. Gain control of all student newspapers. 

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against 
programs or organizations which are under Com- 
munist attack. 

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review as- 
signments, editorial writing, policy-making positions. 

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and mo- 
tion pictures. 

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading 
all forms of artistic expression. An American Com- 
munist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture 
from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awk- 
ward and meaningless forms.” 

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. 
“Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaning- 
less art." 

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling 


The Future Task 


them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and 
free press. 

25 . Break down cultural standards of morality by pro- 
moting pornography and obscenity in books, maga- 
zines, motion pictures, radio and TV. 

26 . Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity 
as “normal, natural, healthy.” 

27 . Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion 
with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and empha- 
size the need for intellectual maturity which does not 
need a “religious crutch.” 

28 . Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression 
in the schools on the ground that it violates the prin- 
ciple of “ separation of church and state.” 

29 . Discredit the American Constitution by calling it in- 
adequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern 
needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations 
on a world-wide basis. 

30 . Discredit the American founding fathers. Present 
them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for 
the “common man.” 

31 . Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage 
the teaching of American history on the ground that 
it was only a minor part of “the big picture.” Give 
more emphasis to Russian history since the Com- 
munists took over. 

32 . Support any socialist movement to give centralized 
control over any part of the culture — education, so- 
cial agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, 
etc. 

33 . Eliminate all laics or procedures which interfere with 
the operation of the Communist apparatus. 

34 . Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities. 

35 . Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI. 

36 . Infiltrate and gain control of more unions. 

37 . Infiltrate and gain control of big business. 

38 . Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police 


The Naked Communist 


to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as 
psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists 
can understand or treat. 

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and me mental 
health laws as a means of gaining coercive control 
over those who oppose Communist goals. 

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage 
promiscuity and easy divorce. 

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the 
negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, 
mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive 
influence of parents. 

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection 
are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that 
students and special-interest groups should rise up 
and me “united force" to solve economic, political or 
social problems. 

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native 
populations are ready for self-government. 

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal. 

45. Repeal the Connally Reservation so the U.S. cannot 
prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction 
over domestic problems. Give the World Court juris- 
diction over nations and individuals alike. 

If the student will read the reports of Congressional 
hearings together with available books by ex-Communists, 
he will find all of these Communist objectives described in 
detail. Furthermore, he will come to understand how many 
well-meaning citizens have become involved in pushing for- 
ward the Communist program without realizing it. They 
became converted to Communist objectives because they ac- 
cepted superficial Communist slogans. Soon they were think- 
ing precisely the way the Communists wanted them to think. 

Let us examine some of these problems at closer range. 


The Future Task 


What About Disarmament ? 

The Communists have created the illusion in free men’s 
minds that “the way to peace is through disarmament.” 
We must not forget that this originated as a Communist 
slogan. Now free men have adopted it as their own and are 
even setting up special commissions to explore ways and 
means to carry it out. In this action we are deliberately 
closing our eyes to everything we promised ourselves at the 
close of World War II and again at the end of the Korean 
War. Experts tell us that to disarm in the face of an obvious 
and present danger is an immoral act. It is an act of self- 
destruction. 

Here are just a few fundamental facts on disarmament 
which the experts who know Communism are pleading with 
us to consider: 

Disarmament means to depend upon agreements instead 
of strength. 

Agreements are absolutely useless unless they can be 
enforced. 

The fallacy of a disarmament agreement with Russia (a 
nation which has violated 51 out of 53 agreements already) 
is this: if Russia chose to secretly rearm we would have lost 
our capacity to enforce the agreement. Such an agreement 
gives a dishonest party a devastating advantage because of 
his capacity to “arm secretly.” In a vacuum of disarmament, 
a government with criminal intentions requires very few sec- 
ret arms to overcome all opposition. This is what Hitler and 
Mussolini taught us. 

On February 3, 1961, Dr. Arnold Wolfers told the Senate 
Committee on Foreign Relations: “A few easily concealed 
or clandestinely manufactured weapons would, in a totally 
disarmed world, give one nation decisive military power over 
others. ... A totally disarmed world is also one in which 
Communists’ characteristics of secrecy and of a society or- 
ganized along military lines would give them maximum 
advantage.” 

But in all this talk about disarmament the thing to re- 


The Naked Communist 


member is that Khrushchev would not dare disarm. His 
armed forces of six million — including two million secret 
police — are not to fight the West but to maintain “domestic 
tranquility” behind the Iron Curtain. They are to suppress 
uprisings which have occurred in the satellites and in Russia. 
Furthermore, Khrushchev is continually haunted by the spec- 
tre of the Red Chinese who would like nothing better than to 
see the Russians disarm. So we repeat, Khrushchev would not 
dare disarm. 

Finally, in answer to those who claim that an arms race 
will lead to war, let us point out the rather obvious fact that 
an arms race is not an underlying cause of war, but a symp- 
tom of political conflict. To disarm in the face of political 
conflict invites war. The United States was well on the way 
to disarming and demobilizing when the Korean War jolted 
us into the realization that vicious forces of conquest were 
still stalking up and down the earth. Because that predatory 
force has not relented, we have had to stay armed. 

In view of all these facts, it should be clear to anyone 
that the cry for disarmament is not the message of peace 
and freedom. It is the message of the enemy. 

What About Peaceful Coexistence? 

The Communists have created another illusion with ref- 
erence to peaceful coexistence. This is the idea that the West 
must be willing to coexist with Communism since the only 
alternative would be annihilation through atomic war. 

The real alternative to co-EXistence is co-REsistance. 
Experts in the field have been saying for years that 
Communism does not have to be tolerated. It has no moral, 
economic or political excuse for existing. Furthermore, it 
is extremely vulnerable to many types of peaceful pressures 
which free men have not yet used. We will discuss these 
in a later section. At this point it is important simply to 
emphasize that Communism can be beaten — and it can be 
done without atomic war. Therefore the whole basis for 
arguing coexistence collapses. Coexistence is a contradiction 


The Future Task 


of terms because it means trying to coexist with world con- 
quest, which is impossible. One must resist or be conquered. 
It also means accepting the status quo of one-third of the 
human race in bondage as a permanent working arrange- 
ment. It means accepting Communism in spite of its deceit, 
subversion and broken covenants. It means tolerating Com- 
munism without resistance. 

The United States Congress was right when it proclaimed 
in its Captive Nations Resolution of July, 1959: 

“The enslavement of a substantial part of the world’s 
population by Communist imperialism makes a mockery of 
the idea of peaceful coexistence.” 1 

And the President sounded a note of awakening resist- 
ance when he said: 

“It is appropriate and proper to manifest to the peoples 
of the captive nations the support of the Government and the 
people of the United States of America for their just aspira- 
tions for freedom and national independence.” 2 

What About the United Nations? 

All over the world people demand that some type of inter- 
national arena be created where disputes between nations 
can be arbitrated or settled without resorting to war. Two 
attempts have been made to create such an arena — the League 
of Nations and the United Nations. Both ran into diffi- 
culty and for the same reason. Both organizations started 
out as exclusive federations of “peace-loving” nations and 
then turned right around and tried to convert themselves 
into world parliaments where all nations could be repre- 
sented including warlike or predatory nations. In both cases 
the predatory nations successfully seized power and almost 
completely nullified all the high-sounding phrases contained 
in their original statements of purpose. 

1 The full text of the Captive Nations Proclamation is contained in 

u. s. news and world report, August 3, 1959, p. 87. 

2 The above issue of u. s. news and world report also contains the 

Presidential Proclamation, p. 87. 


The Naked Communist 


As far as the United Nations is concerned, this weak- 
ness was emphasized by John Foster Dulles when he ad- 
dressed the American Bar Association. He said the failures 
of the UN are due primarily to the fact that its “effective 
functioning depends upon cooperation with a nation which 
is dominated by an international party seeking world dom- 
ination.” 3 

Henry Cabot Lodge pointed out the same thing: “In 
1945 and 1946 . . . the United States assumed that Russia 
was a peace-loving nation, and the whole United Nations 
was based on the assumption that the alliance between the 
United States and the Soviet Union would continue, which 
of course, was a very false, tragically false, assumption.” 4 * & 

There are numerous provisions in the UN Charter which 
permit predatory powers such as the USSR or her satellites 
to bring the orderly processes of the UN to a dead halt. In 
the UN’s 15 years of existence, the USSR has used this or- 
ganization for subversion behind the scenes and legal sabo- 
tage in her open councils. This has not only frustrated the 
peace-preserving powers of the UN but has almost com- 
pletely paralyzed individual action by the other members 
because they have committed themselves to rely on the UN to 
settle disputes. 

When one reflects upon the Soviet veto of the UN at- 
tempt to censure Russia following her invasion of Hungary 
and her veto of the UN attempt to have an investigation of 
the killing of four Americans on the RB-47 in 1960, it empha- 
sizes the long list of atrocities which Soviet leaders have 
committed without punishment or censure even though every 
one of them violated Article 2 of the UN Charter. Consider 
these provisions: 

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the 
sovereign equality of all members. 


3 Wade, William, W the UN today, H. W. Wilson Company, New 

York, p. l.U. 

*“The Case for Severing Relations with Soviet Rulers," u. S. news 

& WORLD REPORT, Dec. 17, 195b, p. 139. 


The Future Task 


2. All Members . . . shall fulfill in good faith the obliga- 

tions assumed by them in accordance with the present 
Charter. ■» 

3. All Members shall settle their international disputes 
by peaceful means. . . . 

4. All Members shall refrain . . . from the threat or use 
of force against the territorial integrity or political 
independence of any state. . . . 

5. All members shall . . . refrain from giving assistance 
to any state against which the United Nations is tak- 
ing preventive or enforcement action. 

In Hungary, China, Southeast Asia, Cuba, Africa, 
Central and South America, Korea — one might say in every 
sector of the world — the USSR has violated these principles 
continually. 

As a result of this vast contradiction between promise 
and performance, the whole UN complex is gradually reach- 
ing an impasse or stalemate. What then can be done with 
Red aggression, with its worldwide program of insurrection, 
riots, civil war and conquest? And what should be done 
with the UN? 

Because the United States is the most wealthy and pow- 
erful nation in the world, she is expected to provide an 
answer. And because practically every other imaginable 
suggestion has been presented, it is time to come up with 
the simple, direct answer which we should have adopted long 
ago: “Turn back to the original intent of the Charter. 
Restrict UN membership to peace-loving nations!” 

This is precisely what Article 4 provides, and it has been 
the violation of this article which has produced most of the 
trouble. Because we have waited so long to eliminate the 
warlike nations, this change will involve some difficulties. 
But this would be nothing compared to the difficulties which 
lie ahead if free men pursue their present course. Due to the 
veto technicalities and numerous violations of American con- 
stitutional law in the existing Charter, it would be necessary 


The Naked Communist 


to reconstruct the entire framework of the UN. Neverthe- 
less it could be done. 

No doubt some would object to the elimination of Russia 
and her satellites from the UN on the ground that it would 
prevent the UN from serving as a world parliament. 

The answer to that objection is the proven fact that 
the UN can never serve peace-loving peoples as long as the 
UN tries to accommodate its forum to the harassment and 
bedevilment of nations who make no pretense at fulfilling 
their obligations either under the Charter or under inter- 
national law. 

What if the founding fathers of the United States had 
tried to include King George in the Constitutional Conven- 
tion? The results would have been as frustrating and ag- 
gravating as they have turned out to be with a predatory 
nation and her satellites sitting in the UN Assembly of peace- 
loving nations. The founding fathers would no doubt look at 
our present UN operation and say: “It is illogical. It is 
illegal. It is impossible.” Fifteen years of UN history painfully 
prove it. 

But would not such action drive Russia and her satel- 
lites into a second association of Red nations and create a 
contest of power blocs? 

This already exists. The only difference would be that 
the Red bloc would not be in the UN to sabotage the united 
desires of the peace-loving nations as it does today. 

Would not such action provoke war? 

Not as long as the West remains strong. It would not 
weaken the West’s military position at all. If anything, such 
action would strengthen it. It would also create the neces- 
sary federation of strength to start putting economic and 
political pressures on Communism and thereby allow her en- 
slaved peoples to strike from within and eventually destroy 
this spectre of human tyranny. This new arrangement would 
give us the ideal vehicle to begin implementing all the fine 
promises we made in the “Captive Nations’ Proclamation” on 
July, 1959. 

Is there no other way? Apparently not. All other ap- 


The Future Task 


proaches turn out to be diversionary. They merely postpone 
the day of honest decision. If free men united to bring about 
this needed change, the new federation of peace-loving na- 
tions could perform a political miracle — one which would give 
new assurance for both peace and prosperity. 

We have a task to perform and time is running out. 

Is the Communist Movement a Legitimate 
Political Party? 

This question grows out of another illusion which the 
Communists created in our minds. They induced us to accept 
the idea that Communism is a legitimate expression of politi- 
cal action. The truth is that Communism is a criminal con- 
spiracy. It is a mistake to treat it as a political party. 

Political groups solve their problems by entering into 
negotiations, attending conferences, and working out their 
differences with bona fide compromises which all parties are 
expected to perform. This has never worked with the Com- 
munists because they use deceit, disregard of laws, violation 
of treaties, intimidation, subversion and open insurrection 
as basic tools of conquest. This makes it a criminal con- 
spiracy. 

Once we realize that Communism is a criminal opera- 
tion, many new avenues of action open before us. For 
example, a criminal problem is not handled by negotiation 
and compromise but by following four steps : 

1. IMMOBILIZE THE CRIMINAL. 

2. RENDER HIM HARMLESS. 

3. GAIN HIS CONFIDENCE. 

4. REHABILITATE HIM. 

It may be recalled that these are the four steps which 
were used in dealing with both Germany and Japan when 
their leaders pursued the criminal course of action which 


The Naked Communist 


precipitated World War II. The Western allies followed these 
steps and Germany and Japan were not only immobilized 
and rendered harmless but they were successfully rehabili- 
tated. After the war West Germany and Japan became 
two of America’s closest supporters. 

Does this mean a preventive war should be waged against 
the criminal Communists? Not at all. It means that while 
there is still time and before a major shooting war is neces- 
sary, free men should utilize available peaceful pressures to 
immobilize the Soviet empire and work for the day when 
her own people can overthrow the tyrannical rule of Red 
leaders from within. 

What peaceful pressures are available? 

We have already mentioned the importance of taking 
away the illegal membership which the USSR and her satel- 
lites hold in the UN. Another highly potent weapon is avail- 
able which would cut off Communist and espionage machinery. 
This is the peaceful weapon of severing diplomatic relations. 
It is the action Thomas Jefferson recommended for nations 
which treat us “atrociously.” He said: 

“I am anxious that we should give the world still another 
lesson by showing to them other modes of punishing in- 
juries than by war. ... I love, therefore . . .(the) proposi- 
tion of cutting off all communications with the nation 
which has conducted itself so atrociously. ” s 

Recently Senator Barry Goldwater and other students 
of the problem have advocated this very type of action against 
the Soviet empire. There are plenty of reasons to justify it. 
Russia is guilty of : 

Continuous violations of treaties and covenants. 

Repeated violations of international law. 

Vicious subversion and interference in the domestic af- 
fairs of other nations. 


5 writings OF THOMAS Jefferson (Thomas Jefferson Memorial Asso- 
ciation, 1 901,-1 905 ) Vol. IX, p. 285. 


The Future Task 


Open warfare against peace-loving peoples. 

Provocative acts with the leveling of insults and false 
charges against the United States. 

Illegal killing of American servicemen. 

Illegal shooting down of American planes. 

Illegal imprisonment of American citizens. 

The lack of political courage to sever diplomatic rela- 
tions with Russia is often covered up with the plea that we 
might lose some important advantages by isolating Russia 
in this manner. 

What advantages? Senator Goldwater has pointed out 
that there are none. Since the United States recognized the 
USSR in 1933, not one single advantage has accrued to the 
United States which could not have been achieved equally 
well — and often far more easily — without recognition. Recog- 
nition turned out to be a tool of conquest for the Communists. 

In addition to isolating Communism internationally, it 
also needs to be outlawed domestically. This is so important 
that Lenin said the Communists must do everything pos- 
sible to avoid it. Whittaker Chambers summarized this 
point when he said: “Lenin had tirelessly taught that when a 
whole Communist Party is outlawed, it is almost wholly par- 
alyzed because it can no longer send into the surrounding 
community the filaments whereby it spreads its toxins and 
from which it draws its strength of life.” 6 

But would not a statute outlawing the Communist party 
threaten legitimate political parties? Not if the statute were 
aimed at any organization “advocating the overthrow of the 
government by force and violence.” Criminal law strikes at 
illegal acts or any conspiracy to commit illegal acts. A con- 
spiracy to overthrow the government by force and violence is 
therefore criminal in nature. Any organization which pro- 
motes such illegal activities should be outlawed. 

As a number of authorities have already pointed out, it 


Chambers, Whittaker, “witness,” page 210. 


The Naked Communist 


is foolish to treat the Communists as a legitimate political 
party as it would be to give bank robbers business licenses. 

Is the Soviet Empire Vulnerable to 
Economic Pressure ? 

Probably the greatest single weakness of the Sino-Soviet 
bloc is her shaky economy. Here is a soft spot where peace- 
ful pressures could be devastating. No amount of Soviet prop- 
aganda can cover up the obvious collapse of the Chinese 
communes and the sluggish inefficiency of the Soviet collec- 
tivized farms. Every single Soviet satellite is languishing in 
a depression. Even Pravda has openly criticized the lack of 
bare essentials and the shoddy quality of Russian-made goods. 

These factors of austerity and deprivation add to the 
hatred and misery of the people which constantly feed the 
flames of potential revolt. Terrorist tactics have been used 
by the Red leaders to suppress uprisings. In spite of the 
virtual “state of siege” which exists throughout the Soviet 
empire, there are many outbreaks of violent protest. 

All of this explains why the Soviet leaders are constantly 
pleading for “free trade,” “long-term loans,” “increased avail- 
ability of material goods from the West.” Economically, 
Communism is collapsing but the West has not had the good 
sense to exploit it. Instead, the United States, Great Britain 
and 37 other Western powers are shipping vast quantities of 
goods to the Sino-Soviet bloc. 

Some business leaders have had the temerity to suggest 
that trade with the Reds helps the cause of peace. They sug- 
gest that “you never fight the people you trade with.” Ap- 
parently they cannot even remember as far back as the late 
Thirties when this exact type of thinking resulted in the sale 
of scrap iron and oil to the Japanese just before World War 
II. After the attack on Pearl Harbor it became tragically 


The Future Task 


clear that while trade with friends may promote peace, trade 
with a threatening enemy is an act of self-destruction. Have 
we forgotten that fatal lesson so soon? 

Could Peaceful Pressures Cause the Communist 
Empire to Explode Internally ? 

The Communist leaders have always been extremely sen- 
sitive to their own internal weaknesses. They frequently 
resort to capital punishment to suppress the bitter criticism 
of their own enslaved people. They use propaganda to boast of 
pretended success in the very areas where they suffer the 
greatest failures. A close scrutiny of recent history will dem- 
onstrate that time and again free men could have tied 
the Communist conspiracy in knots if only they had been 
watching for opportunities to exploit fuming internal pres- 
sures which were ready to explode. 

Many of these pressures are building today. Each one 
of them represents a golden opportunity for direct action 
by the free West. But free men must first make up their 
minds whether they really want freedom for the Iron Cur- 
tain captives. Is it worth giving up a little trade? Is it 
worth the temporary political heat of a showdown in the UN ? 
Is it worth the momentary clamor which Red agents would 
foment if we withdrew diplomatic recognition? 

It is extremely confusing to freedom fighters — especially 
in the satellites — when they watch the failing Communist 
economy being bolstered and fed by 39 Western nations. In 
the UN the distortion of justice and common sense bewilders 
them. In diplomatic circles the constant capitulation and 
compromise outrages them. A refugee from a Russian slave 
labor camp wrote to me : “There must be a noose of ignorance 
around the necks of the West. Don’t they know we would 
eventually overthrow the Communist leaders if the West 
would just stop feeding, fondling and coddling them?” 


The Naked Communist 


In the minds of these people, it borders on criminal neg- 
lect when we withhold the impact of powerful peaceful pres- 
sures which are available to us. During World War II we 
promised freedom to all of these satellite peoples. And we 
should never let the Communists forget that Stalin promised 
them freedom. In his order of the day, No. 130, dated May 1, 
1942, Joseph Stalin declared: 

“It is not our aim to seize foreign lands or to subjugate 
foreign people. ... We have not and cannot have such war 
aims as the imposition of our will and regime on the Slavs 
and other enslaved peoples of Europe who are waiting our 
aid. Our aim consists in assisting these people in their strug- 
gle for liberation from Hitler’s tyranny and then setting them 
free to rule in their own lands as they desire.” 7 

Neither should the West allow Nikita Khrushchev to for- 
get what he has said : “The Soviet Union deeply sympathizes 
with all the nations striving to win and uphold their inde- 
pendence. And these nations can rest assured that the Soviet 
Union, without any meddling in their internal affairs, with- 
out stipulating any conditions, will help them to strengthen 
their independence for which they fought so hard.” 8 

The unbelievable bald-faced deception of such state- 
ments should motivate free nations in their firm resolve to 
strike back at Communism on every front. Too often the 
western apologists for coexistence and “peace at any price” 
are panicked when it is suggested that economic and political 
pressures be applied in order to squeeze the Soviet empire 
into an internal explosion. They wail that such action will 
disturb the peace behind the Iron Curtain. And indeed it 
would. In fact, it should be a standard object of strategy to 
disturb the peace of the Red leaders. This was precisely 
what President Woodrow Wilson was talking about when he 
said : 

“I will not take any part in composing difficulties that 

7 “ON the great patriotic war of the soviet union,” Foreign Lan- 
guage Publishing House, Moscow, 1946, p. 59. 

8 From Nikita Khrushchev’s letter to the Mexican Newspaper, ex- 
celsior, February 28, 1958. 


The Future Task 


ought not to be composed, and a difficulty between an en- 
slaved people and its autocratic rulers ought not to be com- 
posed. We in America have stood from the day of our birth 
for the emancipation of people throughout the World who 
are living unwillingly under governments which were not 
of their choice. ... So long as wrongs like that exist in the 
world, you cannot bring permanent peace to the world. I go 
further than that. So long as wrongs of that sort exist, you 
ought not to bring permanent peace to the world, because 
those wrongs ought to be righted, and enslaved peoples ought 
to be free to right them .” 9 

Just the moment the Western powers develop the cour- 
age to clamp a total trade embargo on the Communist empire 
and then combine it with a policy of “go home and take your 
spies with you,” the hearts of Iron Curtain freedom fighters 
can once more surge with hope. 

Not until then will America’s eloquent Captive Nations 
Proclamation mean anything. 

What Can the Ordinary Individual Do? 

The war between freedom and slavery is not just a fight 
to be waged by Congressmen, the President, soldiers and dip- 
lomats. Fighting Communism, Socialism and the subversion 
of constitutional government is everybody’s job. And work- 
ing for the expansion of freedom is everybody’s job. It is a 
basic American principle that each individual knows better 
than anyone else what he can do to help once he has be- 
come informed. No citizen will have to go far from his own 
home to find a faltering battle line which needs his aid. 
Communist influences are gnawing away everywhere and 
thousands of confused citizens often aid and abet them by 
operating in a vacuum of their own ignorance. The task is 
therefore to become informed and then move out for action ! 

9 Quoted in “Uncompromising Idealism,” by David Lawrence, U. s. 

NEWS AND WORLD REPORT, Aug. 31, 1959, p. 104. 


The Naked Communist 


Just to stimulate a little positive thinking, here are a few 
elementary suggestions for different types of individuals : 


Suggestions for Parents 

1. Stay close to your children to make sure they are 
being trained to think like Washington and Lincoln, not 
like Marx and Lenin. 

2. In providing physical needs for your family, don’t 
forget their spiritual needs. We are in an ideological war. 
From a Marxist viewpoint an atheistic mind is already three- 
fourths conquered. 

3. Take your children to church, don’t send them. Be 
sure they are getting true religious values, not modernistic 
debunking. 

4. Help your children grow up. Don’t fall for the cur- 
rent Socialist-Communist line that parents are a detriment 
to their children. They are only a detriment when they 
don’t do their job. 

5. Children require a formula of 90% love and 10% 
discipline. 

6. Do not fall for the “permissive” school of psychology 
which says discipline will harm human development. Such 
thinking produces hoodlums with maladjusted personalities 
who are likely to fall for every “ism” that comes along. A 
child needs to know that he lives in an orderly world. Disci- 
pline is part of it — not extreme harshness but a reasonable 
and consistent enforcement of the rules. 

7. Because “youth problems” happened to be one of my 
own areas of professional study, I wrote a book designed to 
answer the Communist and Socialist charge that modern 
parents cannot do a good job of raising children. 10 

8. Be active in PTA. If you are not, Communists and 
centralized planners will take over. 


10 so you WANT TO raise A boy, Doubleday, New York, release date, 
January 1, 1962. 


The Future Task 


9. Have a “freedom library” in your home. Include 
good biographies of the founding fathers. 

10. Take a little time each day to keep up with political 
problems at home and abroad. 

11. Subscribe to a good news magazine such as U.S. 
News and World Report. 

12. Where you have older children, make current events 
part of the dinner table talk. Be quick to point out left-wing 
slanting of news, TV or radio broadcasts. There is far more 
of this slanting than most people realize. 

13. Organize a family, a neighborhood or church study 
group. Help your family realize that there is a great strug- 
gle going on in the world which they can help to win. 

14. Let your children see that you are interested in civic 
affairs, that you participate in political affairs, that you are 
concerned with what is going on. They borrow many of their 
own attitudes from you. 

Suggestions for Teachers 

1. The most important single force in winning against 
Communism is in the field of education. Therefore you are 
in the front-line trenches. 

2. Be certain you have taken time to get a good back- 
ground on Communistic thought so you can detect it quickly 
wherever it appears. 

3. Define for students the difference between the factors 
which made Americans the first free people in modern times 
and the principles which have destroyed freedom wherever 
the Socialists and Communists have taken over. 

4. Help the students understand that free enterprise 
has produced and distributed more material wealth than any 
other system man has yet discovered. Point out that it also 
permits most of our citizens to make a living doing the things 
they enjoy. At least they can change jobs if they don’t 
like what they are doing. It is also vital for students to 
appreciate that the remaining weaknesses in our system are 


The Naked Communist 


important, but they are minute compared to the monumental 
problems of the bare-subsistence economies under Socialism 
and Communism. 

5. Beware of those who come pretending to help educa- 
tion when they are trying to seize control of education. So- 
cialist and Communist planners have ambitions to eliminate 
all local control — which means the teachers themselves would 
lose control. 

6. Be alert to the fact that education was infiltrated by 
the Socialist-Communist contingent over thirty-five years ago. 
Many of them were top-echelon personalities who worked 
their way into leading educational organizations. Because 
they were hard workers they gained sweeping control of some 
of our most respected institutions. 

7. Read “Education for One Socialist World,” which is 
Chapter 8 in The UN Record, by Chesly Manly (Henry 
Regnery Co., Chicago, 1955). On page 175 Mr. Manly lists 
a number of books which every teacher should read in order 
to be aware of the attack against American education during 
the past four decades. 

8. In addition, you will find the following books helpful : 

CONQUEST OF THE AMERICAN MIND, by Dr. Felix Witt- 
mer, ( Meador Publishing Co., Boston) 

WHAT’S HAPPENED to OUR schools? by Rosalie M. 
Gordon, a pamphlet published by America’s Future, 
Inc., New Rochelle, N.Y. 

THE TURNING OF THE tides, by Paul W. Shafer and 
John Howland Snow. ( Long House Publishers.) 

progressive education is reducation by Jones and 
Olivier. (Meador Publishing Co., Boston.) 

brainwashing in the high schools by Dr. E. Merrill 
Root. ( Devin-Adair , New York) 


The Future Task 


COMMUNIST-SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA IN AMERICAN 
SCHOOLS, by Verne P. Kaub ( Published by Lakeshore 
Press, Madison, Wisconsin.) 

9. If any of the educational organizations to which you 
belong are Socialist-oriented, try to recapture them. Do not 
try to do it alone. Gather a group of alerted teachers around 
you and move forward as an organized group. 

10. Encourage the teaching of “Communist Problems” 
in the school. Such a course can become an excellent 
vehicle to teach American students how to appreciate their 
own way of life. The name of the course is important. 
“Communist Problems” is likely to be more acceptable than 
teaching “Communism.” 

11. Watch for slanted passages in text books. Socialist 
authors have invaded the textbook field. So have some with 
even more radical views. “Brainwashing in the High 
Schools,” by E. Merrill Root, is an analysis of 11 American 
history books which reflect the destructive left-wing line. 

12. Don’t be misled by the current atheistic drive to 
take God out of the classroom. “Separation of church and 
state” was to keep creeds out of the curriculum, but not God. 
It would be as unconstitutional to teach irreligion in the class- 
room as it would be to emphasize some particular religion. 
As teachers we are not to teach a particular faith, but 
parents are within their rights when they insist that the 
classroom is not be used by those few teachers who seek to 
destroy faith. Teachers who believe that teaching atheism is a 
necessary part of a good education are not really qualified to 
teach in a Judaic-Christian culture. They are entitled to be 
atheists but, as public employees, they are not entitled to 
teach it. If they do, they are violating an important constitu- 
tional principle. 

13. Encourage patriotic speakers at school assemblies. 
Excellent films are also available. Many organizations now 
have well-informed speakers who can give impressive talks 
on subjects which arouse excellent student response. 


The Naked Communist 


14. When a Freedom Forum is held in your area, try to 
attend. 


Suggestions for Students 

1. The mind of the student is considered a major battle- 
field by Communist strategists. The Communist conquest 
of a country is always preceded by the extensive activities 
of “converted intellectuals.” However, the most vigorous 
antagonists of Communism are some of these same intel- 
lectuals who have been disillusioned and returned to the side 
of freedom. 

2. You will never have more time to study Communism 
than while you are in school. Try to get a genuine under- 
standing of it. Learn its philosophy, its history and its falla- 
cies. 

3. When you run across dedicated Socialists, remember 
that the only difference between a Socialist and a Communist 
is in the method of takeover. The desire to seize monolithic 
control of society is the same in both. Sometimes people 
forget that USSR stands for the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics. Some people count Socialism “good” and Com- 
munism “bad.” In reality the two are twins. 

4. Be quick to detect left-wing slanting in textbooks and 
lectures. 

5. Become acquainted with the latest Communist “line.” 
Work up answers to their charges and proposals. 

6. Be sure to remain fair and forthright. Never stoop 
to Communist tactics to win a point. 

7. You can enjoy school far more when your education 
becomes purposeful. Get acquainted with the Communist 
problems and it will suddenly make economics, history, philos- 
ophy, political science, sociology and psychology come alive. 
These are all related to the war for survival in which we are 
now engaged. 

8. Be conscious of the fact that people look at world 
events through one of two windows. Out of one window 


The Future Task 


the students (and sometimes the professor) see only blue 
skies. Out of the other window the student can see storm 
clouds. This is the window to watch. This is where history 
is being made, and the person who doesn’t keep his eye on 
this window is caught unawares when the storm breaks. On 
the day of the Pearl Harbor attack, most Americans had to 
move from window No. 1 to window No. 2 with great speed. 
They came close to being too late. Damage from the world’s 
threatening political storms can be avoided only by anticipat- 
ing them — by being vigilant and alert. 

9. If you have difficulty in philosophy and your mind is 
plagued with doubts, read the experience of a student de- 
scribed in the last chapter of this book. 

10. Resist the radical element on campus who advocate 
“mass action’’ and violent demonstrations. These are usually 
the tools of Communist agitators. They get students to 
demonstrate, and this usually provokes a fight. When the 
police try to restore order, the Communists slip away in an 
effort to let the students take the blame. When Communist 
agitators got the students to wreck the Congressional hear- 
ings at San Francisco during May of 1960, the judge decided 
to release them because he felt the students could already see 
how they had been duped into fronting for professional anti- 
Americans. 

11. Organize a student group to study Communism and 
Americanism. Challenge Socialists and pro-Communists on 
the campus. Publish a paper. Set up a speaker’s bureau. 
Write letters to your school paper. Get experience in making 
peaceful democratic processes work. 

12. A rapidly growing student organization with a patri- 
otic purpose is “The Torchbearers.” Suggestions on how to 
set up a school chapter may be obtained by writing to The 
Torchbearers, 5354 W. 126th Street, Hawthorne, California. 

Suggestions for Businessmen 

1. Remember that Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, 
Madison, Adams, and the rest of the founding fathers were 


The Naked Communist 


not “colonial aristocrats” as some textbooks proclaim, but 
were just successful businessmen. Because they were will- 
ing to sit down and think through the problems of their day, 
we inherited a free nation. 

2. Take time from the pressures of business to stay 
informed. Subscribe to a good news magazine such as U.S. 
News and World Report. 

3. Become a member of an organization which will send 
you frequent intelligence reports on current problems. One 
of the most effective private agencies in this field is the 
American Security Council, 205 West Monroe Street, Chi- 
cago, Illinois. 

4. Take an active part in the political party of your 
choice. Watch for the strong Socialist influence which is 
trying to take over both parties. Do not hesitate to throw 
your financial strength and your time behind the fight for 
freedom. It cost Washington $65,000 to leave his business 
and serve in the Revolutionary Army. In current inflated 
money values this would represent nearly half a million 
dollars. 

5. If you belong to a service club, get it in the fight for 
freedom. Most civic clubs have a special committee to inspire 
patriotic interests. Invite speakers to keep the business com- 
munity alert. 

6. Sponsor essay and speech contests in the schools to 
promote American ideals and resistance to deceptive Com- 
munist propaganda. 

7. Openly resist the sale of goods to the Soviet empire 
and call for a total embargo against the USSR and her 
satellites. 

8. Work for a more equitable tax structure which is 
not arbitrary and confiscatory. Economic freedom is part 
of political freedom. 

9. If your employees are in a union, seek the coopera- 
tion of union officials in conducting a study course on Com- 
munism for your personnel. If no union is involved, ask 
your employees whether they would like such a course. The 
American Security Council can provide a complete program 


The Future Task 


with speakers, films, tapes and literature. Many other or- 
ganizations are also available to help. 

10. Get your local Chamber of Commerce behind regu- 
lar Freedom Forums which will help keep the entire com- 
munity alert. 

11. Be careful not to contribute to an organization 
until you know it is a bona fide patriotic group. Unknowing- 
ly, some businessmen have been financing cited Communist- 
front organizations. If you are a member of the American 
Security Council, you can check on any organization or any 
individual through their files. 

12. Constantly keep in mind that American business 
is a major target for Communist propaganda. Be alert to any 
activities which could feed ammunition to the enemy. 

13. Furnish views and suggestions to your State and 
Federal legislators. A letter to a congressman has more 
impact than many people realize. 

Suggestions for Legislators 


1. The war between freedom and slavery can be lost 
in the legislative halls of free men. The wave of Socialism 
which is sweeping many free western nations toward a kind 
of suppressive feudalism is gaining ground. In this battle 
our legislators are on the first line of defense. 

2. The entire fabric of American security has been badly 
weakened by technical decisions of the Supreme Court in 
recent years. The only remedy is legislative action to restore 
these security laws. 

3. Federal legislators should continue to support the 
Congressional Committees which are under attack by the 
Communist Party and their fellow travelers. This attack is 
a top priority project of the Communist Party at the present 
time. 

4. Restore to Congressional committees the right to de- 
termine whether the questions asked of pro-Communist wit- 
nesses are pertinent. 


The Naked Communist 


5. Restore to Congressional committees the same freedom 
to investigate Communists and pro-Communists that these 
committees have always had when investigating business and 
labor problems. 

6. Restore to the states the right to enforce their own 
anti-subversive laws. 

7. Restore to the Smith Act the provision which makes 
it a crime to teach or advocate the violent overthrow of the 
Government. 

8. Restore to the Smith Act the meaning of “organize” 
which includes organizational work done after 1945 so that 
Communist agents cannot hide behind the statute of limita- 
tions. 

9. Restore to the executive branch of the government 
the right to determine “reasonable grounds” and to dismiss 
security risks in both sensitive and non-sensitive positions of 
the Government. 

10. Restore to the states the right to exclude from public 
employment and education those who refuse to testify about 
their Communist activities and associates. 

11. Restore to the executive branch the right to question 
aliens awaiting deportation about subversive associates and 
contacts, and the right to deport aliens who are found to be 
Communists after entering the United States. 

12. Restore to the executive branch the right to deny 
passports to those who refuse to sign a non-Communist affi- 
davit. 

13. Restore to the states the right to exclude from the 
practice of law those who have been members of the Com- 
munist conspiracy or who refuse to testify about Communist 
activities. 

14. Be alert to any attempt by left-wing forces to dis- 
mantle or emasculate the FBI. 

15. Put into force the excellent recommendations of the 
Commission on Government Security which were published 
in June, 1957, but have never been acted upon. 


The Future Task 


16. Become familiar with the advantages of using pow- 
erful peaceful pressures against the USSR, especially in the 
economic and political fields. 

Suggestions for the Press 

1. Keep in mind the constant effort of the Communist 
apparatus to plant its agents in all mass communications 
media. 

2. Familiarize yourself with the current Communist line 
which appears earlier in this chapter. Watch for individuals 
who shift with that line — often contradicting themselves to 
accommodate the latest zig or zag of party strategy. 

3. In fulfilling the task of exposing crime, corruption 
and inefficiency in the American culture, be careful not to 
destroy confidence in American institutions. Because the 
negative forces in our society are more likely to be “news” 
than the positive accomplishments, it is easy to over-empha- 
size the negative side and provide extremely damaging propa- 
ganda to the enemy. 

4. Run features on current issues which reflect a solid 
American interpretation of the problem. The Communist 
avalanche of literature is often compounded by a left-wing 
slant to the news on a syndicated wire which leaves the Ameri- 
can point of view practically unexpressed. More and more 
newspaper editors are recognizing this problem and are doing 
something about it. 

5. Use quotations from American patriots for box stories 
and fillers. 

6. Develop a program of liaison with public officials so 
they will have an assurance of your ability to keep a confi- 
dence. It is desirable to have the press briefed on develop- 
ments even though they may be confidential. Most officials 
start out with a desire to cooperate closely with the press, 
but they become secretive when distortions and premature 
releases weaken or destroy their capacity to get their job 
done properly. 


The Naked Communist 


7. Some members of the press have the knack of de- 
tecting Communist influences in public life and have made 
excellent contributions by pointing these out. Temporarily, 
this action may not be popular, but it gives a newsman 
stature as events sustain his analysis. We need more analysts 
who are informed and sensitive to the techniques of the 
Communist apparatus. 

Suggestions for Ministers 


1. The churches became a major target for Communist- 
Socialist infiltration many years ago. These people were 
successful in capturing many key positions in a number of 
important religious organizations. Some religious leaders 
openly advocate and defend Communist principles. They 
are apologists for the Soviet Union and even advocate cap- 
itulation under threat of atomic war. 

2. Study Judaism, Christianity and Communism to a 
point where you can quickly detect the fallacies which some 
persons in high places disseminate from their pulpits. 

3. Develop a Bible-reading congregation. 

4. Make religion a practical, dynamic force in the lives 
of the people. 

5. Resist the erosion of the Modernists who seek to dis- 
credit the Bible and to define God as an imaginary non- 
reality. As we pointed out in the first chapter of this book, 
many of those who started out a century ago to attack the 
Bible and to destroy our religious culture were close asso- 
ciates of Karl Marx. 

6. Be alert to detect those who use “Social Christianity” 
to cover up the fact that they are not Christians at all. 

7. Watch for those who would use the principles of 
peace, brotherhood, tolerance, and Christian charity to ob- 
scure the conspiratorial aspects of Communist “peace.” The 
peace of Communism partakes of the prison and the grave. 
Remind professional pacifists who have accepted the paralyz- 
ing peace propaganda of the Communists that the same Jesus 


The Future Task 


who taught “love thy enemy” never advocated surrendering 
to him. The same Jesus who said, “Turn the other cheek” 
to avoid quarreling and bickering in the ordinary course of 
life, also said to take a sword to preserve life (Luke 22:36). 
The Jesus of Nazareth who cleansed the temple was demon- 
strating that Right deserves to be defended. 

8. If you come across those who labor under the mis- 
conception that Communism and Christianity have a com- 
mon denominator, ask them to read the chapter in this book 
entitled, “Did the Early Christians Practice Communism?” 

9. Because of the counseling which ministers do, there 
are strenuous efforts to make inroads into the ministry. Be 
alert to the drive by certain analytical psychiatrists to have 
ministers accept their amoral philosophy. They opine that 
feelings of guilt and a sense of right and wrong cause mental 
illnesses. This entire concept is being discredited. There 
is far more mental health in the Judaic-Christian concept of 
resisting temptation and overcoming mistakes than ever 
emanated from the Freudian couch. I have prepared a rather 
comprehensive article on this subject, entitled, “Law Enforce- 
ment Looks at Mental Health,” which appears in the pro- 
fessional police magazine, Law and Order, for March, 1961. 

10. In counseling students who are having difficulty 
reconciling the many conflicting views which they hear in 
school, you might refer them to the last chapter in this book 
which is designed to help the student recognize the ideological 
conflict now in progress. It is hoped that this material will 
help them find their way through the confusion of many 
voices so as to maintain both moral and intellectual integrity. 

11. Be careful to read books before you recommend 
them. Recently some church groups have been induced to 
recommend books which turned out to be filled with obscenity. 
This is an important part of the Socialist-Communist cam- 
paign to discredit religious culture. What technique could 
better serve their purpose than to have the churches them- 
selves sponsor degenerate literature! 


The Naked Communist 


12. Set up study groups on both youth and adult levels 
to study Communism. Have qualified and well informed per- 
sons serve as discussion leaders. 


The West Can Win 

With every citizen watching for an opportunity to strike 
a blow for freedom, the force of Communism can be halted, 
smothered, and then eliminated. This is our task. Without 
our tolerance and help the Communist empire would never 
have become the second strongest power in the earth. Now 
we have the job of dismantling it. Nikita Khrushchev knows 
the pressures we could bring pouring down upon him if our 
people ever make up their minds to move. 

Any who may lack the courage for positive action might 
well recall the threat of Manuilsky which we have already 
quoted. He described Communist strategy for the period we 
are now passing through : 

“We shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace 
movement on record. . . . The capitalist countries, stupid 
and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruc- 
tion. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon 
as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our 
clenched fist!” 1 

Today Communism is advancing on all fronts. Authori- 
ties say that if we let her feed on the West just a few more 
years it may be too late. How much better to send forth the 
message: “There IS a way to stop Communism and do it 
without a major war!” 

If free men are willing to study the problem and move 
across the world in one vast united front, it is entirely pos- 
sible for the human race to celebrate the close of the Twen- 
tieth Century with this monumental achievement : 

“FREEDOM IN OUR TIME FOR ALL MEN!” 


11 See footnote No. 7, page 208. 


Historical Photographs 




KARL MARX: “If we can but weld our 
souls together, then with contempt shall 
I fling my glove in the world's face, 
than shall I stride through the wreck- 
age a creator iSovfotoj 



FRIEDRICH ENGELS. Marx’s collaborator 
in development of Communist theory: 
“We say: ‘A la guerre comme a la 
guerre’; we do not promise any free- 
dom , nor any democracy.” ISovfotoj 


NICKOLAI LENIN, first Communist dicta- 
tor: “ Marxists have never forgotten 
that violence will be an inevitable ac- 
companiment of the collapse of capital- 
ism . . . and of the birth of socialist 
society.” ISovfotoj 


JOSEPH STALIN, as a young Bolshevik: 
“To choose one’s victim, to prepare 
one’s plans minutely, to stake an im- 
placable vengeance, and then go to bed 
. . . there is nothing sweeter in the 
world.” jUnderwood & Underwood ] 




Tsar Nicholas II and his family in their days of power. At the feet of 
the Empress is the Tsarevitch. Back row: Grand Duchesses. Anastasia, 
Titiana and Olga; Marie is at her Father’s left. fTriangle Photo] 



A successful attempt by the Russian Provisional Government to put 
down a Communist uprising in Petrograd during July, 1917. As a 
result of this Communist defeat, Lenin fled to save his life. \Sovfolof 



First Russian photo of the Bolshevik revolution to reach the United 
States. This shows victorious Communist leaders addressing a large 
crowd in Moscow after seizure of power. jUnderwood & Underwood / 


Bolshevik atrocities. Fifty bodies of community leaders of Wesenberg 
are exhumed from a lake after being shot and mutilated in reprisal 
for the death of two Communists. jUnderwood & Underwood I 





White Russians retaliate by hanging suspected Bolsheviks. During the 
Civil War several million lost their lives. jTriangle Photo / 



Bolsheviks use a confiscated church for a wheat granary. This was part 
of the Red campaign to discourage religious worship. ” ' ' 


I Triangle Photo I 






33 6itaai 

a-HW ihaEuagBffaET, 



Trotsky addresses a contingent of the Red Army which he ultimately 
built up to a force of five million men. jUnderwood & Underwood I 


Trotsky was purged from the Russian Government by Stalin and fled to 
Afexico to escape assassination. Although Trotsky lived under constant 
guard, a killer finally got through to him in August. 1940. and smashed 
his skill with an alpenstock. \Underwood & Underwood / 




A common sight in New York during the Nineteen Thirties when 
American Communists paraded through the streets with their familiar 
slogan: " Defend the Soviet Union.” / Underwood & Underwood j 


One of the meetings of President Roosevelt. Premier Stalin and Prime 
Minister Churchill. This one was held at Teheran during one of the 
most critical periods of World War II. fUnderwood & Underwood] 



F Wr / mmm 





WM i 




MnrTMi 

H \ \ 








For over forty years the collectivized [arms have continually [ailed 
to [ ulfill the dream o[ overwhelming abundance expected by Commu- 
nist leaders. In 1954 official reports showed that Russia was producing 
even less food than it did in 1928 under the NEP. [SovfotoJ 


In 192.1 the Secretary of State. Charles Evans Hughes, explained why 
the United States should not grant formal diplomatic recognition to 
the Communist Government of the IJ.S.S.R.: "There can be no question 
<>l the sincere friendliness of the American people toward the Russian 
people . . . for this very reason . . . nothing should be done to place 
the seal of approval on the tyrannical measures that have been adopted 
in Russia, or take any action which might retard the gradual reassertion 
of the Russian people to their right to live in freedom.” iSovfotof 




Moscow University where education is often used as a political tool and 
professors are among the best paid people in the U.S.S.R. \Sovfotof 



The following is a typical official statement on the purpose of education 
in Russia: “It is important that pupils should clearly realize the doom 
of the capitalistic world, its inevitable downfall . . . and actively get 
prepared when they leave school to be ready to take their place in life, 
in the struggle for a new world, for Communism.” ISovlolol 


FIVE VITAL QUESTIONS 




1 

What Do Defenders of Communism Say? 

The voluminous literature of Communism contains bold 
and sometimes harsh answers to almost any question a student 
may care to ask. However, few students have an oppor- 
tunity to meet anyone who will admit he is a well indoctri- 
nated Communist, and few people have the time or inclination 
to read the technical, cumbersome documents of Communist 
lore. Therefore, the following symposium is designed to 
bring some of these answers together under a number of 
general headings. It will be observed that Communist 
propaganda sometimes contradicts these answers when a true 
statement of doctrine would prove embarrassing. However, 
the answers presented here are taken in most instances from 
the foremost exponents of Marxism and in all such cases repre- 
sent unembellished, non-progaganda answers which teachers 
of Marxism pass along to their own followers. 

PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE 

student: “Do you think there is a possibility that the 
democracies and the Soviet can somehow co-exist?” 



The Naked Communist 


LENIN : “The existence of the Soviet Republic side by 

side with imperialist states for a long time is unthinkable. 

One or the other must triumph in the end. And before that 

end supervenes, a series of frightful collisions between the 

Soviet Republic and the bourgeois states will be inevitable.” 

V. I. Lenin, “report of the central committee at the Sth 
PARTY CONGRESS” (1919). 

OFFICIAL statement: “The proletariat in the Soviet 
Union harbours no illusions as to the possibility of a durable 
peace with the imperialists. The proletariat knows that the 
imperialist attack against the Soviet Union is inevitable; that 
in the process of a proletarian world revolution wars between 
proletarian and bourgeois states, wars for the emancipation 
of the world from capitalism, will necessarily and inevitably 
arise. Therefore, the primary duty of the proletariat, as the 
fighter for socialism, is to make all the necessary political, 
economic and military preparations for these wars, to 
strengthen its Red Army — that mighty weapon of the prole- 
tariat — and to train the masses of the toilers in the art of war.” 

“THESIS OF THE SIXTH WORLD CONGRESS OF THE COMMUNIST 

international.” International Press Correspondence, Novem- 
ber 28, 1926, p. 1590. 


student: “Why do you not go ahead and prove that Com- 
munism will work in your own country before trying to force 
it upon other nations?” 


LENIN : “Final victory can be achieved only on an inter- 
national scale, and only by the combined efforts of the workers 
of all countries.” 


Quoted by Joseph Stalin in, “leninism,” Volume I, p. 170. 

stalin : “This means that the serious assistance of the 
international proletariat is a force without which the problem 
of the final victory of socialism in one country cannot be 
solved 

Joseph Stalin’s letter to Ivanov, p. 9. See also “resolution of 
THE FOURTEENTH PARTY CONFERENCE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 
OF THE SOVIET UNION.” 


STUDENT: “1 am in favor of cordial relations between 
nations. Would you call me an Internationalist?” 


Defenders of Communism 


P. E. VYSHINSKY : “At present the only determining cri- 
terion . . .is: Are you for or against the U.S.S.R., the mother- 
land of the world proletariat? An internationalist is not one 
who verbally recognizes international solidarity or sympathizes 
with it. A real internationalist is one who brings his sym- 
pathy and recognition up to the point of practical and maxi- 
mum help to the U.S.S.R. in support and defense of the U.S.S.R. 
by every means and in every possible form.” 

P. E. Vyshinsky, “communism and the motherland,” Vo- 
prosi Filosofi (Problems of Philosophy), No. 2, 1948. 

STUDENT: “7 thought that during World War II, the 
Communist leaders said they wanted to he friends with the 
United States. I hoped we could continue to be friends." 

varga: “The fact that the Soviet Union and the greatly 
shaken capitalist countries showed themselves to be in one 
powerful camp, ranged against the Fascist aggressors (during 
World War II), showed that the struggle of the two systems 
within the democratic camp was temporarily alleviated, sus- 
pended, but this of course does not mean the end of the strug- 

Varya, “world economy and world politics,” June, 1949, p. 11. 

marshall TITO: “Our collaboration with capitalism dur- 
ing the war which has recently ended, by no means signifies 
that we shall prolong our alliance with it in the future. On the 
contrary, the capitalistic forces constitute our natural enemy 
despite the fact that they helped us to defeat their most dan- 
gerous representative. It may happen that we shall again 
decide to make use of their aid, but always with the sole aim 
of accelerating their final ruin.” 

Reported by the Continental News Service, November 8, 1946, 
and quoted in the “communist threat to CANADA,” Ottawa, 
1947, pp. 10-11. 

student: ‘‘In other words, you pretended to be our 
friends merely as a matter of expediency ? Why would it not 
be to our mutual advantage to continue being friends?" 


The Naked Communist 


DIMITRY z. manuilsky : “War to the hilt between com- 
munism and capitalism is inevitable.” 

Stated in a lecture to the Lenin School on Political Warfare in 
Moscow, 1931. 

STUDENT: “Then why do you even try to maintain peace- 
ful relations with the West?” 

STALIN: “We cannot forget the saying of Lenin to the 
effect that a great deal . . . depends on whether we succeed in 
delaying war with the capitalist countries . . . until proletarian 
revolution ripens in Europe or until colonial revolutions come 
to a head, or, finally, until the capitalists fight among them- 
selves over the division of the colonies. Therefore, the main- 
tenance of peaceful relations with capitalist countries is an 
obligatory task for us.” 

Joseph Stalin, “speech to the 15th congress of the soviet,” 
Selected Works, Vol. X, pp. 95-96; also see pp. 100-101. 

student: “Do you think we should expect this “inevita- 
ble” conflict soon or far in the distant future?" 

LENIN : “To tie one’s hands beforehand, openly to tell the 
enemy, who is at present better armed than we are, whether 
and when we will fight him, is stupidity and not revolutionari- 
ness. To accept battle at a time when it is obviously advan- 
tageous to the enemy and not to us is a crime; and those poli- 
tical leaders of the revolutionary class who are unable to ‘tack, 
to maneuver, to compromise’ in order to avoid an obviously 
disadvantageous battle, are good for nothing.” 

V. I. Lenin, “left-wing communism, an infantile disorder,” 
Selected Works, Vol. X, pp. 95-96; also see pp. 100-101. 

STUDENT: “Perhaps this explains why you Communists 
continue building up a tremendous war machine while pro- 
claiming that you want peace. Don’t you think the West sin- 
cerely wants peace and would like to disarm?" 

OFFICIAL statement: “There is a glaring contradiction 
between the imperialists’ policy of piling up armaments and 


Defenders of Communism 


their hypocritical talk about peace. There is no such con- 
tradiction, however, between the Soviet Government’s prepara- 
tion for defense and for revolutionary war and a consistent 
peace policy. Revolutionary war of the proletarian dictator- 
ship is but a continuation of a revolutionary peace policy by 
other means.” 

“THESIS OF THE SIXTH WORLD CONGRESS OF THE COMMUNIST IN- 
TERNATIONAL.” International Press Correspondence, Novem- 
ber 28, 1928, p. 1590. 

STUDENT : “But would not a so-called revolutionary peace 
policy by ‘other means’ simply be a demand for unconditional 
surrender under threat of extermination? Why do you perpet- 
uate the myth of peaceful coexistence when you openly con- 
sider the West your enemy?" 

dimitry z. manuilsky: “Today, of course, we are not 
strong enough to attack. ... To win we shall need the element 
of surprise. The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So 
we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace move- 
ment on record. There will be electrifying overtures and un- 
heard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and 
decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. 
They will jump at another chance to be friends. As soon as 
their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched 

Stated in a lecture at the Lenin School on Political Warfare 
in Moscow, 1931. 


ILLEGAL OPERATIONS 


student: “Perhaps this helps to explain why the Com- 
munist strategists have never been able to take over a single 
country by persuasion or by the popular election of legal candi- 
dates. Must you Communists always resort to subversion and 
illegal political operations?” 

lenin: “The absolute necessity in principal of combin- 
ing illegal with legal work is determined not only by the sum 


The Naked Communist 


total of the specific features of the present period ... but also 
by the necessity of proving to the bourgeoisie that there is 
not, nor can there be, a sphere or field of work that cannot be 
won by the Communists. ... It is necessary, immediately, for 
all legal Communist Parties to form illegal organizations for 
the purpose of systematically carrying on illegal work, and 
of fully preparing for the moment when the bourgeoisie re- 
sorts to persecution. Illegal work is particularly necessary in 
the army, the navy and police.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. X, pp. 172-173. 

STUDENT: “What happens to a -person who is selected for 
illegal operations ?” 

LENIN: “A working class agitator who in any way 
shows talent and promise should not work eleven hours a day 
in a factory. We should see to it that he lives on the funds of 
the Party, that he is able in good time to adopt an illegal man- 
ner of existence, that he has the opportunity of changing his 
sphere of activities; otherwise he will not gain experience, he 
will not broaden his outlook, and will not be able to hold out 
for at most several years in the struggle against the police.” 

V. I. Lenin, “lenin on organization,” p. 95. 


REVOLUTIONARY VIOLENCE 

STUDENT : “Could, an American who might be converted to 
Communism belong to the Party but still hold out for peaceful 
reform instead of revolutionary violence?” 

LENIN: “It is not enough to take sides in the question 
of political slogans; we must take sides also in the question of 
an armed uprising. Those who are opposed to armed uprising, 
those who do not prepare for it, must be ruthlessly cast out of 
the ranks of the supporters of the revolution and sent back to 
the ranks of its enemies, of the traitors or cowards; for the 
day is approaching when the force of events and conditions of 


Defenders of Communism 


the struggle will compel us to separate enemies from friends 
according to this principle.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. Ill, p. 351. 

STUDENT: “Then apparently you believe social progress 
is possible only by revolutionary violence rather than by legis- 
lative reform ?” 

LENIN : “Marxists have never forgotten that violence 
will be an inevitable accompaniment of the collapse of capi- 
talism on its full scale and of the birth of a socialist society. 
And this violence will cover a historical period; a whole era 
of wars of the most varied kinds — imperialist wars, civil wars 
within the country, the interweaving of the former with the 
latter, national wars, the emancipation of the nationalities 
crushed by the imperialist powers which will inevitably form 
various alliances with each other in the era of vast state-capi- 
talist and military trusts and syndicates. This is an era of 
tremendous collapses, of wholesale military decisions of a 
violent nature, of crises. It has already begun, we see it clear- 
ly — it is only the beginning.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. VIII, pp. 315-316. 

STUDENT: "Do you mean it is impossible for an American 
to be a true Communist without betraying his own country?’’ 

LENIN : “Hatred for one’s own government and one’s 
own bourgeoisie — the sentiment of all class conscious workers 
... is a banal phrase if it does not mean revolution against 
their own governments. It is impossible to rouse hatred 
against one’s own government and one’s own bourgeoisie with- 
out desiring their defeat.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. V, p. U7. 

STUDENT: “Would an American Communist be expected 
to engage in subversive and disloyal activities even if the 
United States were at war?” 


The Naked Communist 


LENIN : “A revolutionary class in a reactionary war can- 
not but desire the defeat of its government. . . . And revolu- 
tionary action in wartime against one’s own government 
undoubtedly and incontrovertibly means not only desiring its 
defeat, but really facilitating such defeat.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. V, p. 142 . 

student : “But if you are so anxious to break down loy- 
alty to individual governments why do you insist on Ameri- 
can Communists maintaining a loyalty toward the U.S.S.R. ?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “In view of the fact that the 
USSR is the only fatherland of the international proletariat, 
the principle bulwark of its achievements and the most impor- 
tant factor for its international emancipation, the international 
proletariat must on its part facilitate the success of the work 
of socialist construction in the U.S.S.R. and defend it against 

the attacks of the capitalist powers by all the means in its 
power « 

H * ‘PROGRAM OF THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL,” p. 66. 


student. In othcv wovds — and to be move specific — you 
are against nationalism except when applied to the U.S.S.R.?” 


P. E. VYSHINSKY: “The defense of the U.S.S.R., as of the 
socialist motherland of the world proletariat, is the holy duty 
of every honest man everywhere and not only of the citizens 
of the U.S.S.R.” 


P- E - Vyshinsky, “communism and the 
(Problems in Philosophy) No. 2, 1948. 


MOTHERLAND,” 


student: “If American Communists are expected to 
overthrow their own Government and serve the interests of 
the U.S.S.R., would that not make them anarchists and insur- 
rectionists ?” 

LENIN: “Only insurrection can guarantee the victory of 
the revolution.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected WORKS,” Vol. Ill, p. 327. 


Defenders of Communism 


LENIN: “The revolution confronts us directly with the 
problem of armed insurrection. And to speak of this without 
proper technical preparations, is merely to mouth empty 
phrases. He who wants the revolution must systematically 
prepare for it the broad masses, who will, in the process of 
preparation, create the necessary organs of the struggle.” 

“LENIN, THE GREAT STRATEGIST OF THE CLASS WAR,” p . 17 . 

student: “And all this for the violent overthrow of the 
Government?" 

LENIN: “The purpose of insurrection must be, not only 
the complete destruction, or removal of all local authorities 

and their replacement by new but also the expulsion of the 

landlords and the seizure of their lands.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. Ill, p. 377. 

WAR AND PEACE 

student: “Does not such an inflammatory policy com- 
pletely contradict your widely publicized program for a peace 
offensive ?” 

official statement: “Complete Communism will know 
no more war. A real, assured people’s peace is possible only 
under Communism. But the goal cannot be reached by peace- 
ful, ‘pacifist’ means; on the contrary, it can be reached only 
by civil war against the bourgeoisie.” 

“fundamentals of communism,” published by the Communist 

Party of America, p. 31. 

student: “In other words, Communists in all countries 
constitute a war party rather than a political party designed 
to promote peace?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “In the capitalist world today, 
the revolutionary proletariat supports the war of defense of 
the proletarian state (the U.S.S.R.) against the imperialist 

states.” “fundamentals of communism,” published by the Communist 

Party of America, p. 31. 


The Naked Communist 


STUDENT: But the Soviet Union has consistently waged 
or encouraged wars of aggression. How can you conscienti- 
ously support these?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “Every war of the Soviet Union 

is a war of defense, even if it is conducted with offensive 
means.” „ 

FUNDAMENTALS OF communism,” published by the Communist 
rarty of America , p. 31. 

STUDENT: “If you are going to call all Soviet wars ‘de- 
fensive’ even when you admit she is using ‘offensive means’ 
what will be your attitude toivard other nations which main- 
tain heavy armaments simply as a defense against Communist 
aggression?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: (We stand for the) “systematic 
exposure and stigmatizing of all capitalist armaments, war 
pacts and war preparations and especially of the defense of the 
Soviet Union against the league of the imperialists.” 

P™;! DA ? E , NTALS 0p communism,” published by the Communist 
t'arty of America , p. 31. 

t 

student : Are the Communist leaders expecting a spon- 
taneous uprising in various countries or will they order their 
followers to engineer an uprising?” 

LENIN: “If the situation is ripe for a popular uprising, 
in view of the fact that the revolution in social relationships 
has already taken place, and if we have prepared for it, we 
can order an uprising.” 

V. I . Lenin, ‘‘selected works,” Vol. Ill , p. 298. 

STUDENT . What methods would you use to overthrow the 
Government?” 

LENIN : “Riots — demonstrations — street battles de- 

tachments of a revolutionary army — such are the stages in 
the development of the popular uprising.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. Ill , p. 312. 


Defenders of Communism 


STUDENT : “Based on experience, what are the most ideal 
circumstances for a successful insurrection?” 

LENIN: “Combining of a mass political strike with an 
armed uprising.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. Ill, p. 374. 

THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL 

STUDENT : “Originally , what did you say about the organ- 
ization which was supposed to run the world revolution?” 

OFFICIAL statement: “The Communist International is 
the concentrated will of the world revolutionary proletariat. 
Its mission is to organize the working class of the world for 
the overthrow of the capitalist system and the establishment 
of Communism. The Communist International is a fighting 
body and assumes the task of combining the revolutionary 
forces of every country.” 

“THE COMMUNIST,” V ol. 1, No. 1, July 1921, p. 11. 

STUDENT: “Was the purpose of the Communist Interna- 
tional to spread dissension and build the Red Army?” 

official statement : “In order to overthrow the inter- 
national bourgeoisie and to create an International Soviet 
Republic as a transition stage to the Communist Society, the 
Communist International will use all means at its disposal, 
including force of arms.” 

“THE COMMUNIST,” V ol. 1, No. 1, July 1921, p. 11. 

STALIN : “The tasks of the Party in foreign policy are : 
1 — to utilize each and every contradiction and conflict among 
the surrounding capitalist groups and governments for the 
purpose of disintegrating imperialism; 2 — to spare no pains 
or means to render assistance to the proletarian revolution in 


The Naked Communist 


the West; 3 — to take all necessary measures to strengthen the 
Red Army.” 

Joseph Stalin, “party after seizure of power,” Pravda 
August 28, 1921. ’ 


STUDENT: “What was the program of the Communist In- 
ternational?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “The Communist International 
must devote itself especially to . . . everyday organization 
work ... in the course of which work legal methods must un- 
failingly be combined with illegal methods; organized work 
in the army and navy— such must be the activity of the Com- 
munist Parties in this connection. The fundamental slogans 
of the Communist International in this connection must be 
the following: 

Convert imperialist war into civil war; 

Defeat ‘your own’ imperialist government; 

Defend the U.S.S.R. and the colonies by 
every means in the event of imperialist war 
against them.” 

“PROGRAM OF THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL,” p. 84. 

STUDENT: “Did the Communist International depend up- 
on Communist parties in various countries or did it operate 
independently ?” 

OFFICIAL statement: “The successful struggle of the 
Communist International for the dictatorship of the prole- 
tariat presupposes the existence in every country of a com- 
pact Communist Party hardened in the struggle, disciplined, 
centralized, closely linked to the masses.” 

“PROGRAM OF THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL,” p. 76. 

STUDENT: “What was the obligation of an organization 
such as the Communist Party of America when it affiliated 
with the Communist International?” 


Defenders of Communism 


official statement : “Each party desirous of affiliating 
to the Communist International should be obliged to render 
every possible assistance to the Soviet Republics in their 
struggle against all counter-revolutionary forces. The Com- 
munist parties should carry on a precise and definite propa- 
ganda to induce the workers to refuse to transport any kind 
of military equipment intended for fighting against the Soviet 
Republics, and should also by legal or illegal means carry on 
a propaganda amongst the troops sent against the workers’ 
republics, etc.” 

“THE THESIS AND STATUTES OF THE COMMUNIST INTERNA- 
TIONAL,” as adopted at the Second World Congress, July 17 
to August 7, 1920, p. 28. 

student: “Was it intended from the beginning that 
Communist leaders in Russia would dictate the policies of 
the Communist Party of America?” 

EARL BROWDER: “The Communist Parties of the various 
countries are the direct representatives of the Communist 
International, and thus, indirectly of the aims and policies of 
Soviet Russia.” 

"COMMUNISM IN THE UNITED STATES,” p. 8. 

official statement: “Representatives of Soviet Russia 
in various countries, engaging in political activities, should 
co-ordinate these activities in some form or other with the 
activities and policies of the respective Communist Parties.” 

“RESOLUTION ON THE RELATION OF COMMUNIST PARTIES TO 

SOVIET government representatives,” adopted by the second 
convention of the Communist Party of America, “the com- 
munist,” Volume II, No. 8, p. 8, August 1, 1920. 

Alexander Trachtenberg : “Consistently supporting the 
Soviet Union since its inception, American Communists were 
acting as internationalists and as Americans.” 

Alexander Trachtenberg, “the soviet union and the 
American people,” appearing in “the communist,” Vol. 
XVIII, No. 9, p. 885, September, 1939. 

student: “In 19 A3 the Communist International was 


The Naked Communist 


302 suddenly dissolved. Was this designed to pacify a rising wave 
of anti-Communist sentiments during World War II?” 


HANS BERGER: “Since correct strategy consists in unit- 
ing and concentrating all forces against the common enemy, 
necessitating the elimination of everything which makes such 
unification and concentration difficult, therefore, the dissolu- 
tion of the Communist International, decided upon unanimous- 
ly by the Communist Parties, was doubtless an act in the 
interests of facilitating victory over the fascist enemy.” 


REMARKS ON THE DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE DISSOLUTION 
of THE COMMUNIST international,” appearing in “THF 
COMMUNIST,” Vol. XXII, No. 11, p. 1020 , November, 191,3. 


STUDENTS . Did the dissolution of the Communist Inter- 
national result in a weakening of the solidarity between Com- 
munist Parties throughout the world?” 


HANS BERGER: “Among the reasons which the leaders of 
the Communist Parties considered in supporting the dissolu- 
tion of the Communist International was doubtless the ques- 
tion of strengthening the Communist Parties.” 


“REMARKS ON THE DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE DISSOLUTION 
OF THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL,” appearing in “THE COM- 
MUNIST, Vol. XXII, No. 11, p. 102H, November, 191,3. 


student: “Did it weaken the plans for world revolu- 
tion ?” 

HANS BERGER: “The Communist Parties have thus 
never sacrificed their Marxist-Leninist principles, which know 
no boundaries, and which can never be given up by them, but 
guided by their principles fight on with the utmost consist- 
ency. “REMARKS ON THE DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE DISSOLUTION 
of the communist INTERNATIONAL,” appearing in “the com- 
munist,” Vol. XXII, No. 11, p. 1021. 

student: “Would this represent the official vietv of the 
Communist Party of America?" 


Defenders of Communism 


GIL GREEN: “Since November, 1940, our Party has not 
been an affiliate of the Communist International and has had 
no organizational ties with it. But who can deny that our 
Party has nonetheless fulfilled its obligation to the American 
Working class and people and in this way to the working class 
and people of the world?” 

Gil Green, “the dissolution of the communist interna- 
tional,” a speech delivered on May 26, 1943, p. 3. 

“Nor is the further existence of the Communist Interna- 
tional necessary as the living embodiment of the principle 
of internationalism and international working class solidarity. 
The fight for internationalism has not disappeared. It has 
been raised to new and more glorious heights.” 

Gil Green, “THE DISSOLUTION of the communist interna- 
tional,” p . 8. 

“The dissolution of the Communist International does not, 
therefore, mark a step backward. . . . Millions all over the 
world live, work and fight under the bright banner of Marx- 

ism. qh (jrcen, “the dissolution of the communist interna- 
tional,” p . 9. 

DIPLOMATIC INTRIGUE 


STUDENT: ‘‘During World War II what did Stalin say the 
Russian policy was toward nations which were then under 
Nazi domination?” 

stalin : “We are waging a just war for our country and 
our freedom. It is not our aim to seize foreign lands or to 
subjugate foreign people. Our aim is clear and noble. We 
want to free our Soviet land of the German-Fascist scoundrels. 
We want to free our Ukrainian, Moldavian, Byelorussian, 
Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian and Karelian brothers from 
the outrage and violence to which they are being subjected 
by the German-Fascist scoundrels. . . . 

“We have not and cannot have such war aims as the im- 


The Naked Communist 


position of our will and regime on the slavs and other en- 
slaved peoples of Europe who are awaiting our aid. Our aim 
consists in assisting these people in their struggle for libera- 
tion from Hitler’s tyranny and then setting them free to rule 
in their own lands as they desire.” 


Stalin’s Order of the Day, No. 130, May 1 , 1948 , quoted in, 
ON THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR OF THE SOVIET UNION,” Foreign 
Language Publishing House, Moscow, 1946 , p. 59 . 


student. What excuse could Stalin and the Communist 
leaders have for doing the very opposite of what they had 
promised?” 


LENIN . The strictest loyalty to the ideas of Commu- 
nism must be combined with the ability to make all necessary 
practical compromises, to maneuver, to make agreements, zig- 
zags, retreats and so on, so as to accelerate the coming to 

P V. I. Lenin, LEFT-WING COMMUNISM — AN INFANTILE DISORDER ” 

International Publishers, New York, 1940 , pp. 75-76. 

STALIN: “Sincere diplomacy is no more possible than 
dry water or iron wood.” 

Quoted in Department of State Publication No. 4264, p. 30 . 


ETHICS AND MORALS 


student: “Doesn’t this approach to international rela- 
tions sound more like a criminal code of conduct rather than 
sincere diplomacy? Does Communist Morality permit this?” 

LENIN: “We say: Morality is that which serves to 
destroy the old exploiting society and to unite all the toilers 
around the proletariat, which is creating a new Communist 
society. Communist morality is the morality which serves 
this struggle. . . .” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. IX, p. 477 . 

OFFICIAL statement: “Morals or ethics is the body of 
norms and rules on the conduct of Soviet peoples. At the root 


Defenders of Communism 


of Communist morality, said Lenin, lies the struggle for the 
consolidation and the completion of Communism. Therefore, 
from the point of view of Communist morality, only those 
acts are moral which contribute to the building up of a new 
Communist society.” 

Radio Moscow, August 20, 1950. 

student: “But this sounds like an excuse for doing 
whatever one may find expedient rather than following a sys- 
tem of rules for right living. Assuming Communism were 
right, would that justify a communist in lying, stealing or 
killing to put Communism into effect?” 

william z. foster: “With him the end justifies the 
means. Whether his tactics be ‘legal’ and ‘moral,’ or not, does 
not concern him, so long as they are effective. He knows that 
the laws as well as the current code of morals, are made by 
his mortal enemies. . . . Consequently, he ignores them in so 
far as he is able and it suits his purposes. He proposes to 
develop, regardless of capitalist conceptions of ‘legality,’ 
‘fairness,’ ‘right,’ etc., a greater power than his capitalist 
enemies have.” 

William Z. Foster, “syndicalism,” p. 9. 

student: “Would you then deny the possibility of there 
being an eternal, God-given code for moral or ethical con- 
duct ?" 


lenin: “We do not believe in eternal morality, and we 
expose all the fables about morality.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. IX, p. A78. 

MARX: “Law, morality, religion are ... so many bour- 
geois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many 
bourgeois interests.” 

Karl Marx, “communist manifesto,” and quoted in the “com- 
munist HANDBOOK,” p. 35. 

engels: “We therefore reject every attempt to impose 
on us any moral dogma whatsoever as an eternal, ultimate and 


The Naked Communist 


forever immutable moral law on the pretext that the moral 
world too has its permanent principles which transcend his- 
tory and the difference between nations. We maintain on the 
contrary that all former moral theories are the product, in the 
last analysis, of the economic stage which society had reached 
at that particular epoch. And as society has hitherto moved 
in class antagonisms, morality was always a class morality; 
it has either justified the domination and the interests of the 
ruling class, or, as soon as the oppressed class has become 
powerful enough, it has represented the revolt against this 
domination and the future interests of the oppressed.” 

Friedrich Engels, quoted in “handbook of marxism,” p. 2U9. 

THE BIBLE 


student: “Then what is the Communist attitude toward 
the Bible which contains many moral teachings?" 


OFFICIAL statement: “A collection of fantastic legends 
without any scientific support. It is full of dark hints, histor- 
ical mistakes and contradictions. It serves as a factor for 
gaining power and subjugating the unknowing nations.” 


Quoted from the Russian Dictionary under 
nomics, Vol. Ill , No. 7, March 27 , 1951 . 


'■'flKloTIAN ECO- 


ENGELS: “It is now perfectly clear to me that the so- 
called sacred writings of the Jews are nothing more than 
the record of the old Arabian religious and tribal tradition, 
modified by the early separation of the Jews from their tri- 
bally related but nomadic neighbours.” 

Friedrich Engels, “SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE,” p. 6J>. 


RELIGION 


STUDENT: “If you reject the Bible, do you also reject all 
religion and all of the institutionalized morality which it rep- 
resents ?" 


Defenders of Communism 


official statement : “The philosophy of Marxism-Len- 
inism — the theoretical foundation of the Communist Party — 
is incompatible with religion.” 

“YOUNG BOLSHEVIK,” No. 5-6, 1946, p. 58. 

LENIN : “Religion is a kind of spiritual gin in which the 
slaves of capital drown their human shape and their claims 
to any decent human life.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” International Publishers, N.Y. 

1948, Vol. XI. 

student : “Could, not a Communist enjoy religious activity 
as a matter of conscience and as a private right?” 

LENIN : “To the party of the Socialist proletariat . . . 
religion is not a private matter.” 

V. I. Lenin, “religion,” p. 9. 

Yaroslavsky : “Every Leninist, every Communist, every 
class-conscious worker and peasant must be able to explain 
why a Communist cannot support religion; why Communists 
fight against religion.” 

E. Yaroslavsky, “RELIGION in the U.S.S.R.,” p. 20. 

STUDENT: “But supposing I were a Communist and still 
ivanted to go to Church?” 

official statement : “If a Communist youth believes in 
God and goes to Church, he fails to fulfil his duties. This 
means that he has not yet rid himself of religious superstitions 
and has not become a fully conscious person (i.e., a Commu- 
nist). ••YOUNG bolshevik,” No. 5-6, 1946, p. 56. 

lenin : “A young man or woman cannot be a Commu- 
nist youth unless he or she is free of religious convictions.” 

“young communist truth,” October 18, 1947. 

lenin : “We must combat religion — this is the ABC of 
all materialism, and consequently Marxism.” 

V. I. Lenin, “religion,” p. 14. 


The Naked Communist 


student: “What is your attitude toward individual 
churches? Take the Catholic Church, for example.” 

YAROSLAVSKY : “The Catholic Church, with the pope in 
its van, is now an important bulwark of all counter-revolu- 
tionary organizations and forces.” 

E. Yaroslavsky, “religion in the u.s.s.r., pp. 36-37. 

student: “Are you against all Christianity?" 

lunarcharsky : (Russian Commissioner of Education) : 
“We hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best of them 
must be considered our worst enemies. Christian love is an 
obstacle to the development of the revolution. Down with love 
of one’s neighbor! What we want is hate. . . . Only then can 
we conquer the universe.” 

Quoted, in U. S. Congressional Record, Vol. 77, pp. 1539-151*0. 

student: “ How do you justify Communist ‘hate’ propa- 
ganda of this kind?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “Hatred fosters vigilance and an 
uncompromising attitude toward the enemy and leads to the 
destruction of everything that prevents Soviet peoples from 
building a happy life. The teachings of hatred for the enemies 
of the toilers enriches the conception of Socialist humanism by 
distinguishing it from sugary and hypocritical ‘philanthropy.’ ” 

Quoted from the “small soviet encyclopedia,” Moscow, 191*7, 

Vol. XI, p. 101*5. 

STALIN : “It is impossible to conquer an enemy without 
having learned to hate him with all the might of one’s soul.” 

Joseph Stalin, “the great patriotic war of the soviet 

UNION,” Moscow, 191*6, p. 55. 

student: “And what is your attitude toward the Jewish 
people and their religion?” 

MARX: “What was the foundation of the Jewish reli- 


Defenders of Communism 


gion? Practical needs, egoism. Consequently the monotheism 
of the Jew is in reality the Polytheism of many needs. . . . 
The God of practical needs and egoism is money. . . . Money is 
the jealous God of Israel, by the side of which no other God 
may exist. . . . The God of the Jews has secularized himself 
and become the universal God. ... As soon as society succeeds 
in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism, the huckster 
and the conditions which produce him, the Jew will become 
impossible. . . . The social emancipation of the Jew is the 
emancipation of society from Judaism.” 

KARL MARX, “SELECTED ESSAYS,” pp. 92-97. 

student : “In view of all this, why is it that Communist 
propaganda sometimes pretends a tolerance for religion?” 

Yaroslavsky: “In our work among religious people we 
must bear in mind Lenin’s advice to utilize every method avail- 
able to us, or, as he said, we must ‘approach them this way 
and that way’ in order to stimulate them to criticize religion 
themselves.” 

E. Yaroslavsky, “religion in the u.s.s.R.,” p. 61. 

student: “If religion is so bad, do you think it will 
gradually die out?” 

Yaroslavsky : “It would be a great mistake to believe 
that religion will die out of itself. We have repeatedly em- 
phasized Lenin’s opinion that the Communist Party cannot 
depend upon the spontaneous development of anti-religious 
ideas — that these ideas are molded by organized action.” 

E. Yaroslavsky, “religion in the u.s.s.R.,” p. 61. 

STUDENT : “Do you think a person’s attitude toward reli- 
gion should be changed by friendly persuasion?” 

lenin : “The fight against religion must not be limited 
nor reduced to abstract, ideological preaching. This struggle 


The Naked Communist 


must be linked up with the concrete practical class movement ; 
its aim must be to eliminate the social roots of religion.” 

V. I. Lenin, “religion,” p. li. 

official statement: “The struggle against the Gospel 
and Christian legend must be conducted ruthlessly and with 
all the means at the disposal of Communism.” 

RADIO LENINGRAD, August £7, 1950. 

student: “Is it true that you have already suppressed 
the clergy in Russia?” 

Stalin: “Have we suppressed the reactionary clergy? 
Yes, we have. The unfortunate thing is that it has not been 
completely liquidated. Anti-religious propaganda is a means 
by which the complete liquidation of the reactionary clergy 
must be brought about. Cases occur when certain members 
of the Party hamper the complete development of anti-religi- 
ous propaganda. If such members are expelled it is a good 
thing because there is no room for such ‘Communists’ in the 
ranks of the Party.” 

Joseph Stalin, “leninism,” Vol. I, p. 387. 

student: “What do you propose to substitute for reli- 
gion?” 

lenin : “We said at the beginning . . . Marxism cannot 
be conceived without atheism. We would add here that atheism 
without Marxism is incomplete and inconsistent.” 

V. /. Lenin, “religion,” Introduction, p. 3-6. 

student: “If you are going to take away the concept of 
God, what spiritual substitute do you propose to offer your 
people?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “What better means of influenc- 
ing pupils than, for example, the characteristic of the spiritual 
figure of Stalin given in the Short Biography: ‘Everyone 
knows the irresistible, shattering power of Stalin’s logic, the 
crystal clearness of his intellect, his iron will, devotion to the 


Defenders of Communism 


party, his modesty, artlessness, his solicitude for people and 
mercilessness to enemies of the people.’ ” 

“teacher’s gazette,” March. 17, 1947. 

STUDENT : “I understand Soviet leaders missed no oppor- 
tunity when Stalin was alive to indoctrinate the children with 
the idea of Stalin as a spiritual figure. What was the slogan 
stamped on children’s toys?" 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT : “Thank you, Comrade Stalin, for 
my joyous childhood.’’ 

Quoted in the U. S. Dept of State Publication, No. 4264, p. 25. 


INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND 
CIVIL LIBERTIES 


student: ‘‘Is there any opportunity for freedom and 
democracy under Communism?" 

engels: “We say: ‘A la guerre comme a la guerre’; we 
do not promise freedom nor any democracy.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. IX, p. 242. 

student: “Then you do not believe that men should be 
free and equal in the enjoyment of life, liberty and the pursuit 
of happiness?" 

engels : “As long as classes exist, all arguments about 
freedom and equality should be accompanied by the question: 
Freedom for which class? And for what purpose? The equality 
of which class with which? And in what relation?” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. X, p. 266. 

STUDENT : “But is it not your desire to have freedom and 
equality for all classes ?” 

engels: “We do not want freedom for the bourgeoisie.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. X, p. 266. 


The Naked Communist 


student : “Do not the people in Communist satellites want 
freedom and equality for their citizens?” 

ENGELS : “Anyone who talks about freedom and equality 
within the limits of toiler democracy, i.e., conditions under 
which the capitalists are overthrown while property and free 
trade remain — is a defender of the exploiters.” 

V. I. Lenin in “selected works,” Vol. X, p. 266. 

student: “Do you believe in freedom at all?” 

LENIN: “While the state exists there is no freedom. 
When freedom exists, there will be no state.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. VIII, p. 87. 

student : “But the U.S.S.R. still preserves the State. Does 
this mean the government of Russia is not intended to promote 
the freedom of the Russian people ?” 

ENGELS: “So long as the proletariat still uses the state 
it does not use it in the interest of freedom but in order to 
hold down its adversaries.” 

Quoted by Lenin in his “selected works,” Vol. VII, p. 81. 

student: “Then do I conclude from this that in Russia 
you do not even pretend to have the civil liberties which we 
enjoy over here?” 

VYSHINSKY: “In our state, naturally there is and can 
be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for the foes 
of socialism. Every sort of attempt on their part to utilize 
to the detriment of the state — that is to say, to the detriment 
of all the toilers — these freedoms granted to the toilers, must 
be classified as a counter-revolutionary crime.” 

Vyshinsky, “law of the soviet state,” (MacMillan Co., New 

York, 19i8), p. 617. 

student : “Supposing I were living in Russia and wanted 
to publish a newspaper which criticized the government. 


Defenders of Communism 


Would I be granted the same freedom of press which 1 enjoy 
in America?" 


stalin : “What freedom of the press have you in mind? 
Freedom of the press for which class — the bourgeoisie or the 
proletariat? If it is a question of freedom of the press for the 
bourgeoisie, then it does not and will not exist here as long 
as the proletarian dictatorship exists.” 

Joseph Stalin, “leninism,” Vol. I, p. 403. 

STUDENT: “Then you mean freedom of the press is only 
for the privileged proletariat? It ivould not include a person 
like myself ?” 

STALIN : “We have no freedom of the press for the bour- 
geoisie. We have no freedom of the press for the Mensheviks 
and Socialist-Revolutionaries, who represent the interests of 
the beaten and overthrown bourgeoisie. But what is there 
surprising in that? We have never pledged ourselves to grant 
freedom of the press to all classes, and to make all classes 
happy. Joseph Stalin, “leninism,” Vol. I, p. 404 . 

student: “But how can a government fairly administer 
its laws unless they apply equally to all the people?” 

LENIN : “Dictatorship is power based upon force and 
unrestricted by any laws. The revolutionary dictatorship of 
the proletariat is power won and maintained by the violence 
of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie — power that is un- 
restricted by any laws.” 

V. I. Lenin, “selected works,” Vol. VII, p. 123. 

student: “But if laws are against classes rather than 
violators, how can there be any justice?" 

VYSHINSKY : “The task of justice in the U.S.S.R. is to as- 
sure the precise and unswerving fulfillment of Soviet laws by 
all the institutions, organizations, officials and citizens of 
the U.S.S.R. This the court accomplishes by destroying without 


The Naked Communist 


314 pity all the foes of the people in whatever form they manifest 
their criminal encroachments upon socialism.” 

Andrei Y. Vyshinsky, “the law of the soviet state,” p. 498. 


EDUCATION 


student : “Let me ask a few questions about Soviet 
schools and the Communist theory of education. How would 
you describe the objectives of education in Russia?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “It is in the schools, at the desk, 
in the first class, that the foundations for a Communist out- 
look are laid in future Soviet citizens. The country entrusts the 
school with its most treasured possessions — its children — and 
no one should be allowed to indulge in the slightest deviation 
from the principles of the Communist materialistic upbringing 
of the new generation.” 

“LITERARY gazette,” September S, 1949. 

student: “Would it not be better to give students a broad 
view of all governments and different economies so they could 
draw their own conclusions?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “The Soviet school cannot be sat- 
isfied to rear merely educated persons. Basing itself on the 
facts and deductions of progressive science, it should instill 
the ideology of Communism in the minds of the young genera- 
tion, shape a Marxist-Leninist world outlook and inculcate the 
spirit of Soviet patriotism and Bolshevik ideas in them.” 

"FOR FURTHER PROGRESS IN SOVIET SCHOOLS,” taken from “CUL- 
TURE and LIFE,” August 31, 1947. 

student: “Is it fair to force the minds of the rising gen- 
eration to accept only the values which a current political 
regime wishes to impose upon them?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “It is important that pupils should 


Defenders of Communism 


clearly realize the doom of the capitalistic world, its inevitable 
downfall, that they should see on the other hand the great 
prospects of our socialist system, and actively get prepared 
when they leave school to be ready to take their place in life, 
in the struggle for a new world, for Communism.” 

“TEACHER’S gazette,” September 13, 1947. 


LABOR 


STUDENT: “Since Communism claims to represent the 
interests of the laboring class, what is the official Communist 
attitude toward the labor movement?” 

LENIN : “It will be necessary ... to agree to any and 
every sacrifice, and even — if need be — to resort to all sorts 
of devices, maneuvers and illegal methods, to evasion and 
subterfuge, in order to penetrate into the trade unions, to re- 
main in them, and to carry on Communist work in them at all 
costs. y j Genin' “left-wing communism,” p. 38. 

STUDENT: “I think the average American working man 
would be interested in knowing what the Communists do when 
they control a labor union. How do the Communists treat 
labor unions in Russia where they have complete control?” 

victor Kravchenko (Former Government Official now 
defected): “The local (Communist) party organization elects 
one of its suitable members to become president of the trade 
union. Generally speaking, the Soviet trade unions have to 
see that the workers execute the program.” 

Quoted in House Un-American Activities Committee publica- 
tion, “100 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT COMMUNISM,” 
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1949, p. 78. 

student : “But does that not make the union a subservient 
arm of government rather than an organization of workers? 
What if a nation wanted to strike?” 


The Naked Communist 


KRAVCHENKO: “The union’s job is to see that strict dis- 
cipline is maintained, that there will be no strikes, that the 
workers work for wages established by the central govern- 
ment, that the workers carry out all the decisions, resolu- 
tions, et cetera, of the party.” 

House Un-American Activities Committee publication, “100 
THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT COMMUNISM,” p. 78. 

STUDENT: “But what would happen if I were a worker in 
Russia and wanted to quit my job ?” 

KRAVCHENKO: “Every citizen in the Soviet Union has a 
passport. On the passport is his photograph. There is also a 
special page on which a stamp is put which indicates the place, 
date and type of employment. If you leave your job in one fac- 
tory and go to another without the permission of your director 
you will be prosecuted under the law for violation of the law 
prohibiting unauthorized change of employment. This refers 
not only to laborers but to any kind of employee.” 

“100 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT COMMUNISM,” p. 78-70. 

STUDENT: “In view of these statements I would like to 
conclude with one more question : Is this the hope for humanity 
which the Soviet offers the world?” 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: “The Soviet is an inspiring 
example for the proletarian revolution in the rest of the world 
. ... (It) shows the powerful achievements of the victorious 
proletariat and the vast superiority of Socialist to Capitalist 
economy. The Soviet Union is an inspiring example for the 
national self-determination of the oppressed peoples.” 

“FUNDAMENTALS OF communism,” Published by the Communist 

Farty of America , p. 19. 



2 

How Does a People Build a Free Nation? 

During the latter part of the eighteenth century a phe- 
nomenal political development occurred which created the 
framework for a new civilization. This was the establishment 
of the first free people in modern times. In the panoramic 
history of the human race it was an epic achievement. 

At the time this important political leap took place the 
whole pattern of human existence was bogged down by three 
man-made systems which had enslaved mankind. The first 
was the political system throughout the world which consisted 
of monarchial dictatorships where life, liberty and property 
were subject to the more or less fickle whims of individual 
potentates. The second oppressive system was the economic 
pattern of the world which was rooted in a variety of feudal 
contracts where the majority of the people wore out their 
lives as serfs on vast estates carved from the spoils of military 
conquest. The third system which dominated the lives of 
mankind was the overexpansion of institutionalized religion. 
The professional guardians of man’s spiritual welfare had 
practically choked off all channels of free spiritual expression 


The Naked Communist 


so that matters of opinion and conscience were often scruti- 
nized and controlled by oppressive surveillance. 


Rise of the Liberals 


For several hundred years prior to the eighteenth century 
a few liberal rebels had struck out fiercely against the Frank- 
enstein systems which enmeshed mankind, and many of these 
liberals had left their mark. They were called “liberals” be- 
cause they desired to liberate the race from these man-made 
systems. They wanted man controlling the systems instead 
of the systems enslaving man. Today “liberals” are often those 
who would like to restore those systems and once more make 
man their minions, but here we shall speak of liberals in the 
original sense — “liberators from man-made systems.” 

The first group of liberals to gravitate together in suffi- 
cient quantities to take decisive action was a contingent of 
visionary men scattered among the American colonies. His- 
torians say it is surprising how few voices in that day were 
prepared to speak up for complete liberation, but these few 
were sufficiently strong to chart a blueprint for the first free 
nation in modern times. 

Of course, in many ways it was a most reckless venture. 
These American political pioneers risked life, property and 
the rights of citizenship by participating in this liberation 
movement. Nevertheless, they were successful to a degree 
never exceeded by political leaders in any other time or genera- 
tion. Perhaps the following outline will illustrate why. 


Political Philosophy of American Founding Fathers 


The American founding fathers were very wmiommon 
men. They were neither anarchists nor revolutionists but 
were among the most successful political and business leaders 
from each of the colonies. In this sense, they were both phys- 


Building a Free Nation 


ically and mentally equipped to be empire builders, and be- 
fore the king had made his imperialism completely intolerable 
they had, in many cases, been among the most active subjects 
of the king carrying out the crown’s business among the 
colonies. Therefore, by their own contemporary standards, 
they could scarcely be called “proletariat.” As a group they 
were students of economics and political science, and when 
they set their hands to the task of creating a new nation they 
drained off the best thinking of men like John Locke, Baron de 
Montesquieu and Adam Smith besides adding many ingenious 
contributions from the inspiration of their own minds. 

All of this evolved into a unique political philosophy 
worthy of the most careful study. The documents these men 
produced reflect the ingredients of this philosophy. They re- 
veal that those who subscribed to it had the following funda- 
mental convictions: 

They believed that certain inalienable rights of man are 
derived from God and not from any human agency ; therefore, 
no human agency can rightfully disturb them. 

They believed class distinctions must be eliminated, that 
there is no place among free men for classes or castes. The 
public officer, the merchant, the banker, the farmer, the me- 
chanic, the teacher — all are honorable and necessary, worthy 
of being treated as equals. They believed the progress of the 
human race will not be the result of pitting one class against 
another but will come by uniting all groups or classes in one 
concentrated offensive against man’s common enemies : 
poverty, ignorance, disease and war. 

They believed that in pursuing happiness, men must be 
free to work at any livelihood which their experience, train- 
ing and native qualifications will permit them to secure and 
hold. 

They believed men must be free to enjoy the fruits of 
their labor — which means the protection of property rights. 

They believed men must be secure in their homes and the 
privacy of their lives. 

They believed there must be good will, generosity and 


The Naked Communist 


320 tolerance between those of difference professions, those of 
different religions and those of different races. 

A Philosophy Becomes a Reality 

The translating of these principles from theory to prac- 
tice has been a long and painfully slow process. Nevertheless, 
the historic steps which were followed constitute the straight 
and narrow way through which any and every people must 
pass if they are to gain and retain their freedom. These his- 
toric steps were as follows: 

first: The redemption of the people’s freedom by an of- 
ficial Declaration of Independence in 1776. 

SECOND: The enforcement of that Declaration by resort 
to arms from 1776 to 1783. 

third: For the first time in the history of the world a 
government was established with its powers strictly defined 
in a written document — the United States Constitution. 

fourth : The Constitution provided for a republican form 
of government. This is government by elected representatives 
rather than government by emotional mass participation as 
in a pure democracy. 

FIFTH : For the first time in history a government was 
set up under a sovereign trinity — three equal branches of gov- 
ernmental authority — the executive, the legislative and the 
judicial. The separation of powers among three equal branches 
of government came from the brilliant mind of Baron de 
Montesquieu (1689-1755). James Madison was a particularly 
warm admirer of Montesquieu and was responsible for the 
introduction of this principle into the framework of the Con- 
stitution. 

sixth : Each branch of government was to be subject to 
a system of checks and balances from the other two branches 
so as to maintain a healthy balance of power. Government has 
been defined as society’s power of “organized coercion.” The 
genius of Montesquieu’s principle of separation of powers is 


Building a Free Nation 


the fact that when one branch of government exceeds its au- 
thority, one or both of the other branches combine against it 
to use their powers of coercion to put down the oppression of 
the offending branch. This makes it unnecessary to have the 
people rise up in revolutionary force to put down oppression. 

SEVENTH : All powers not specifically delegated to the 
Federal Government were retained by the states and the 
people. The doctrine of the contractual basis of government 
with the reservation of political sovereignty in the people was 
described by John Locke in his “Second Treatise of Civil Gov- 
ernment," published in 1690. 

eighth : The following freedoms were guaranteed to the 
sovereign citizen : 

1. Freedom of religion (First Amendment) 

2. Freedom of speech (First Amendment) 

3. Freedom of press (First Amendment) 

4. Freedom of assembly (First Amendment) 

5. Freedom to petition the government for grievances 
(First Amendment) 

6. Freedom to bear arms (Second Amendment) 

7. Freedom from illegal search of persons, houses, pa- 
pers or effects (Fourth Amendment) 

8. Freedom from prosecution without due process of law 
(Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments) 

9. Freedom from multiple prosecutions for the same of- 
fense (Fifth Amendment) 

10. Freedom from the necessity of testifying against one’s 
self (Fifth Amendment) 

11. Freedom from imprisonment without a speedy and 
public trial (Sixth Amendment) 

12. Freedom from excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel 
and unusual punishments (Eighth Amendment) 

13. Freedom from slavery or involuntary servitude (Thir- 
teenth Amendment added in 1865) 

14. Freedom to vote regardless of race or sex (Fifteenth 
Amendment added in 1870 and the Nineteenth Amend- 
ment added in 1920) 


The Haked Communist 


ninth : Social and political reform along liberal lines 
was encouraged within the various states. While serving as 
governor of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson led the way by en- 
couraging public education, dividing church and state, break- 
ing down the medieval laws of inheritance to prevent mono- 
poly of land and wealth, advocating the emancipation of 
slaves, prohibiting the importation of slaves, revising the 
criminal laws, suggesting representation according to popula- 
tion; declaring the right to vote should be extended to all men 
who might be subject to military duty and not merely to land- 
owners; encouraging self-government in the counties and 
towns of the state. 

tenth: The Civil War established the sovereignty of the 
Federal Government as the dominant authority of the Union 
(from which individual states could not secede and against 
which individual states could not pass conflicting laws.) This 
gave solidarity to the United States and a uniformity among 
the states which had been previously disputed. The Civil War 
also opened the way for the emancipation of all men living 
within its boundaries. 

eleventh : Down through the years “promotional” legis- 
lation was passed to promote the general welfare of all 
citizens by encouraging interstate transportation, transconti- 
nental communications, colonization of public lands, cheap 
postal service, development of waterways and resources. 

twelfth: “Restrictive" legislation was passed for the 
purpose of protecting the individual citizen against various 
systems which began to encroach upon his welfare. Anti-trust 
legislation was passed to restrict the activities of monopolies 
in business and preserve free enterprise. Labor legislation 
was passed to fix responsibility for union leadership. Anti- 
crime legislation was passed to protect the citizens against 
organized underworld forces. 

Thus, a whole new pattern of human government has 
been born among men. It is a political framework designed 
to keep the ultimate control of the government in the hands of 
the people who live under that government. It is an expres- 


Building a Free Nation 


sion of political philosophy which makes it possible for men 
to protect themselves against the expanding power of man- 
made systems. It is a government of the people, by the people, 
for the people. It is the gradual unfolding of six centuries of 
true liberalism. 


Results of 175 Years of American Liberalism 


The encouragement of private initiative and self-determi- 
nation and the protection of the individual citizen from the 
encroachment of man-made systems have now had 175 years 
to prove themselves. Did the liberation of the citizen from 
the systems of the past prove beneficial? 

The United States, like all new countries, started poor in 
capital and badly in debt. Although other nations have often 
had equal access to natural resources, the United States slow- 
ly but consistently forged ahead. Today, with only 7 per cent 
of the world’s population and 6 per cent of the earth’s terri- 
tory, the United States has acquired through peaceful indus- 
try nearly 50 per cent of the world’s developed wealth. Each 
year its citizens grow, build, sell, buy and use more goods and 
services than any other country in existence. With a popula- 
tion of 180 million it has succeeded in approaching the econo- 
mists’ dream of total employment by providing jobs for 63 
million people while approximately 37 million of its youth 
have been enrolled in school. Each year the people of the 
United States spend more than 200 billion dollars on personal 
goods and services. This means a per capita income of $1,453 
which is twice the per capita income in Britain, five times the 
per capita income in Russia, and seven times the per capita 
income in Italy. 

According to the American Automobile Association, the 
people of the United States spend more than 9 billion dollars 
on vacations each year. Individual savings amount to 17 
billion dollars annually, and 3 out of 4 families are covered 
by life insurance. Of the 50 million dwelling units in the 


MINUTES OF WORK REQUIRED IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES TO EARN ONE POUND OF FOOD 




The Naked Communist 


324 



e i 

o 

o 

u 

o 

5 


Si s'- 


4 

E 

o 

— *o 
o 


a> o * a» .2 i a 1 

so a. > «| '• u. CO 


Q.I 

£ Q.I 

M 

a» -c * -c 

2 e! S § 

yj u. uj , u_ 


a> 

O) 

o S 

2 § 
o o 
L» VJ 


OQ 

-Q 


/b Oleomargarine 
lb Sugar 


Building a Free Nation 


nation, 60 per cent are occupied by their owners. The millions 
of acres of developed farm land produce more food than its 
citizens can eat. The productive capacity of the United States 
is the largest in the world. It owns 30 per cent of the world’s 
railroad mileage, 76 per cent of its automobiles, 51 per cent 
of its trucks, 47 per cent of its radios, 42 per cent of the elec- 
tric power output, 47 per cent of its steel. 

Each year the United States produces 51 per cent of the 
world’s output of petroleum and about 30 per cent of its coal. 
The U.S. merchant fleets have replaced Britain’s as the rulers 
of the seas with the greatest volume of foreign trade. 1 

The Pattern for Abundant Living 

World travelers or people who have lived abroad can 
appreciate the abundant living of the United States better 
than the average American. The table on the opposite page 
illustrates how little time it takes an American citizen to earn 
the necessities of life and why he is able to spend so much of 
his income on travel and items of commerce which foreign 
citizens would call luxuries. This table shows how many 
minutes the average citizen of leading countries must work 
to pay for one pound of the various items listed. 2 

In this list the statistics for potatoes may be used as an 
illustration of what has been happening in the world. Russia, 
for example, produces more potatoes than any other country 
in the world, but a Russian must work four times as long as 
an American to buy one pound of potatoes. And observe that a 
Russian must work twenty-seven times as long as an American 
to buy one pound of sugar ; twelve times as long as an Ameri- 
can to buy one pound of oleomargarine. 

In the United States by 1951 there were 105 million radios. 


1 Statistics taken from the “1954 information almanac” published 
by the MacMillan Co., New York, p. 80. 

2 Statistics taken from U.S. Bureau of Labor and quoted in the “1954 
INFORMATION ALMANAC,” p. 130. 


The Naked Communist 


326 14 took the average citizen 1 day and 2 hours to earn 

enough money to buy an average radio. In France it requires 
TVi days of toil to pay for an average radio, in Italy 15 days, 
in Russia 27 days.* 

In the United States there are 201,277 physicians, 87,000 
dentists and 1,439,030 hospital beds. The life expectancy in 
the United States is 66.9 years for males and 71.5 years for 
females. In Russia the last life expectancy tables show the 
average to be 41.9 years for males and 46.8 years for females. 4 

Certain foreign propaganda agents have tried to depict 
U.S. wealth as a fortuitous gift of nature. Economists have 
pointed out that many foreign nations have equal access to 
resources and could duplicate the wealth of the United States 
if they were willing to accept the principles of government 
and economics which make the development of such wealth 
possible. Propaganda agents have insisted that since the 
United States has become remarkably wealthy it should 
divide that wealth with the rest of the poverty-stricken world. 
Economists have answered this by pointing out that what 
America has to share with the world is not so much her wealth 
as her time-tested system of government and economics. 

If America’s wealth were spread around the world it 
would soon be dissipated, but if her system of free govern- 
ment and free enterprise were spread around the world, na- 
tions would soon find them to be perpetual producers of wealth. 
What foreign nations envy in America is the fruition of 175 
years of true liberalism. 


s “1954 INFORMATION ALMANAC,” p. SO. 

4 “STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE USA— 1952,” published by the U. S. 
Dept, of Commerce, pp. 9J,G-9G0. 



3 

What is Free Enterprise Capitalism? 

Marx made his most damaging mistake while drawing up the 
blueprints for a Communist society by designing them for a 
creature which never existed. He misinterpreted the nature 
of man. Since then, the Communists have expended vast 
quantities of strategy and energy trying to change the in- 
stinctive desires of man, but this has proven impossible. 

Marx likewise miscalculated while attempting to analyze 
free enterprise capitalism. His prophecies concerning its un- 
avoidable collapse failed to materialize. In fact, the very op- 
posite occurred. While nations which toyed with Socialism 
and Communism progressed slowly, stood still or slid back- 
wards, Capitalism rolled steadily on. 

Two things in particular have made modern Capitalism 
increasingly successful. First, its capacity to satisfy the in- 
herent needs and desires of man, and second, its capacity 
to function efficiently with very little guidance or supervision. 
It is sometimes called a natural system of economics because it 
tends to adjust automatically to human requirements. Never- 
theless, being a child of nature, Capitalism contains a certain 
spirit of the jungle when observed in its wild, uncultivated 


The Naked Communist 


state where men have used it for selfish, individual survival. 
However, under domestication and tempered with the ingredi- 
ent of good will toward men, Capitalism has proven to be man’s 
most efficient device for the developing of material wealth and 
for general social advancement ; in other words, for community 
survival. 

In order to appreciate the natural qualities of Capitalism 
which have proven beneficial to mankind, we should first ask 
ourselves, “What is the nature of man ? What are his desires 
and needs?” 


The Nature of Man 


Under careful scrutiny, man turns out to be a physical- 
spiritual being. To ignore either facet of his nature would be 
as fatal for us at it was for Marx. 

On the physical side, we observe that man is an elaborate 
and complex organism with a capacity to register and react to 
sensations ranging from excruciating pain to ecstatic pleasure. 
Bradford B. Smith calls this man’s pain-pleasure scale. A vast 
array of human needs grow out of man’s desire to avoid pain 
or discomfort and achieve physical satisfaction and pleasure 
from life. Some of these would be: 

Satisfying hunger 
Quenching thirst 
Satisfying tastes 

Being warm in cold weather, cool in warm weather 
Avoiding illness 
Being relieved of pain 
Having comfortable and attractive clothes 
Having a comfortable home and surroundings 
Enjoying perfumes and pleasant odors 
Hearing pleasant sounds 
Enjoying relaxation and recreation 
Participating in marital associations 
Enjoying the sensation of movement and travel 
Seeing colorful objects or colorful scenery 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


Now let us take a moment to consider the other half of 
man’s nature — the spiritual side. This is sometimes called 
man’s fear-hope scale. Man, as an intelligent, self-knowing, 
self-determining being, is capable of having strong feelings 
ranging all the way from sublime hope to deep fear and de- 
spair. Sometimes these are closely related to physical needs 
and frustrations; sometimes they are purely intellectual. But 
regardless of their origin, they are very real and result in a 
wide pattern of intellectual or spiritual needs : 

To be of individual importance so as to count for some- 
thing as a person. 

To be a party in interest — to be identified with the system. 

To enjoy owning “things.” 

To be appreciated for some unique and important con- 
tribution. 

To have a satisfactory degree of economic security. 

To feel the satisfaction of sacrificing or risking something 
to achieve progress. ( This is sometimes erroneously 
called the “gambling” instinct.) 

To have the opportunity for creativity. 

To feel family solidarity. 

To enjoy the right of privacy. 

To have freedom of expression in matters of opinion. 

To be protected in convictions of religion and conscience. 

To feel significant in determining matters of political im- 
portance. 

Man's Mainspring of Action 

In studying the nature of man it soon becomes apparent 
that his “mainspring of action” is the driving necessity to 
satisfy both physical and spiritual needs. Many economic 
systems which men have invented tend to smother or ignore 
these needs. To that same extent these systems are bound to 
smother man’s greatest source of motivating power — the 
anxiety to satisfy these deep, throbbing human desires. 


The Naked Communist 


330 For ty years of Communism in the U.S.S.R. have eloquently 
confirmed this. The Communist leaders have suppressed 
the natural desires of their people and have tried to moti- 
vate them to action through fear. But this has not 
worked because fear is primarily a depressant instead of a 
stimulant. On the long pull it becomes a dull, paralyzing 
drug affecting both brain and muscle, and leaves a smouldering 
ash of combustible hostility. “Work through fear” can nevei 
compete successfully with the tantalizing opportunity provided 
by Capitalism to constantly satisfy natural human needs. 
Satisfying these needs is almost the entire source of power for 
Capitalism’s productive momentum. 

Of course, if human beings made an attempt to rush 
around in breathless haste trying to satisfy all of these desires 
to their utmost, they would probably die in their early youth. 
Therefore Providence has endowed each human being with a 
built-in reactor against speed which serves to prevent or dis- 
courage over-indulgence. It is called “inertia.” As each person 
feels an inward desire to satisfy some physical need, he simul- 
taneously feels the strong gravitational pull of laziness or 
inertia. Thereby hangs an important principle of economics : 
Man evei tends to satisfy his wants with the least possible 
exertion.” 

Perhaps we should mention in passing that capitalism 
gives full vent to this principle by encouraging men to con- 
tinually seek cheaper sources of power and try to develop 
more efficient machines to do the world’s work instead of using 
human and animal muscle. Even as late as 1900 over 50 per 
cent of U.S. power was provided by animals and men, but 
undei a half century of capitalistic development they now sup- 
ply only 2 per cent of the power. The rest comes from ma- 
chines. Other political and economic systems claim to be in 
favor of mechanization, but no other system is able to promote 
technological development as rapidly as capitalism because 
competitive survival becomes so important that it makes it 
worthwhile to throw away machines as soon as they become 
obsolete, also to discard outmoded sources of power. Mecha- 
nization on American farms came about through economic 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


necessity while mechanization on socialized farms is looked 
upon as desirable but not particularly necessary. 


The Law of Variation 


The genius of Capitalism is not merely that it satisfies the 
desires and needs of mankind generally, but it responds to the 
factor of variation as between individuals. It allows each man 
to do anything he wishes so long as he can survive at it. There- 
fore each man continually surveys the field of economic oppor- 
tunity and gradually tries to push himself into that phase of 
work which best satisfies him. 

This is one of the greatest blessings of free enterprise 
Capitalism. To a remarkable extent it allows a man to do just 
about whatever he wants to do. Laborers are not conscripted 
nor told they cannot strike ; nor are they ordered to remain in 
certain occupations as tends to be the case in socialized and 
communized countries. 

Under Capitalism Everyone Can Gain 

A study of human nature reveals that “value” is psycho- 
logical rather than real. Whether a thing is “worth” a certain 
amount depends entirely on the mental value attached to it. 
Capitalism has proven to be a dynamic economy in which every- 
one participating in a transaction can increase the value of 
what he has, or, in other words, make a profit. This can be true 
of both the buyer and the seller. For example, take a man 
who wants to buy a used car. He has a certain amount of 
money or credit. When he offers this money to the dealer it 
means that he would rather have the car than that amount 
of money — the “value” of the car is greater to him than the 
“value” of the money. If the dealer agrees it means that the 
dealer would rather have the money than the car. In fact, he 
won’t sell the car unless the price he gets is of greater value 


The Naked Communist 


332 than the value of the car. As the car is driven away, 

both men have made a profit. Both men feel they have im- 
proved their position as a result of the transaction. 

This is a strong contributing factor to the success of 
Capitalistic free enterprise. It allows everyone to win, either 
by making a profit or by improving his position as the result 
of an honest transaction. 


The Meaning of a Free Economy 

Capitalism thrives best in a free economy but freedom is 
a much misunderstood subject. For example, there is no such 
thing as total, unrestricted freedom. Freedom means simply 
the chance to choose. Therefore freedom can only relate itself 
to specific choices such as the freedom to speak or not to 
speak, the freedom to believe or not believe, the freedom to buy 
or not to buy, and so forth. Furthermore, freedom can move in 
only one direction at a time. If a man has ten dollars and 
chooses to spend it on a night of celebration he has thereby 
lost the freedom to spend that same ten dollars on some new 
clothes. Once the choice is made, a person is not free to avoid 
the consequences of that choice. That is why we say there is 
no such thing as unrestricted freedom, or freedom in general. 
Freedom is always restricted to some specific choice and free- 
dom is always restricted to choosing one direction at a time. 

It is for this reason that a free economy requires a con- 
tinuous education of its people so that they will exercise their 
“freedom to choose” in such a way that it will sustain sound 
moral principles and build a dynamic economy with a strong 
social structure to preserve it. In making such choices, the 
people must sense what is best for both the individual and 
the community. They must be well informed. They must 
know enough about each problem so they can anticipate 
what the result will be when they have made their choice. 

There are many notable examples in both modern and 
ancient history to illustrate what happens when people are 
only casually concerned with their right to make a choice or 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


exercise their freedom. Free peoples require alert, aggressive 
leadership and a socially and politically conscious citizenry. 
This is not easily maintained, but it is the price of freedom. 
Sometimes the streak of natural laziness in people makes them 
wish that a commission, a dictator or a king would make all the 
decisions and force the people to do what is good for them. 
But this is the road to ruin for a free economy. The people 
must retain the sovereign right to choose, for that is all free- 
dom is. 

Now we come to the four great freedoms which must 
always exist in a truly free economy. 


1. FREEDOM TO TRY 


One of the most essential ingredients in a healthy economy 
is the freedom to try. This is really the freedom to achieve 
and it is based on the principle that “the genius of one or a few 
men cannot begin to compare in the aggregate to the genius of 
all the people.” 

Therefore, in a free country a man can develop a new kind 
of shorthand, a different kind of screwdriver, a new breed 
of cattle, or an improved type of mousetrap. When he is 
through, no one may wish to buy the new product or service, 
but at least he is free to invent it and try to sell it if he can. 
This is an in indispensable characteristic of Capitalism — the 
freedom to try. 

One of the reasons atomic energy was shared with the 
people for peacetime development was because Americans have 
been educated to believe that this is the best way to harness 
atomic power for a vast multitude of domestic services. With 
many thousands of scientists working on ways and means to 
exploit atomic power — instead of using just a few hundred — 
the results should be correspondingly greater. This is par- 
ticularly true where each of the scientists is free to try any- 
thing his inventive genius may dictate. 

This was precisely the way we developed radio, television, 
the prevention of polio, the wonders of the modern automobile 


The Naked Communist 


334 and the sound-barrier-breaking speed of the propellerless jets. 
By way of contrast, it is interesting to note that the providing 
of an adequate road system was reserved to the State and Fed- 
eral Governments. Notice that this monopolized program has 
never come up to the public needs at any time in our history. 
It is interesting to consider what might have happened if high- 
ways had been left in the open market where businessmen could 
compete for the opportunity of serving the public with ade- 
quate systems of highway facilities. In fact, during recent 
years there have been several places where toll roads have been 
built by private capital with the permission of state legis- 
latures because the people were so dissatisfied with the in- 
efficiency of government supervised thoroughfares. 


2. FREEDOM TO SELL 


If men are to be left free to try their skill and inventive 
genius they must also be protected in their freedom to sell 
their product for a profit. Of course, some new product might 
make a whole industry obsolete, temporarily throw thousands 
out of work and require numerous economic, social and politi- 
cal readjustments. But this is one of the keys to success in 
a free enterprise economy. It must not be curbed except 
in the case of products or procedures which involve an immoral 
or criminal aspect, such as narcotics, pornographic literature, 
quack medicines, fake stocks, and so forth. 

Freedom to sell also implies the freedom to make a profit 
even if the price of a product is set at a level which wipes out 
the profit of a competitor. At first glance this may seem to 
be a cold, heartless system of economics, but if an American 
travels abroad through Communist or Socialist countries he 
begins to appreciate that “Freedom to Sell” is really the op- 
portunity to survive. This means that a competitor must 
exert his faculties to produce more efficiently and reduce 
his price, or improve the quality of his product, so that the 
public will pay the difference to get it. In either case, the 
public benefits, and newly improved forms of material wealth 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


are created for the use of the public simply because two or 
more companies are competing briskly in order to survive. 


3. FREEDOM TO BUY 


Now, of course, if the inventor of some new product is to 
enjoy the freedom to sell, then the public must certainly enjoy 
the freedom to buy. One of the most fatal restrictions on a 
dynamic capitalistic economy is rationing or governmental 
control of commerce so that the people are told what they can 
buy, in what quantity, where and at what price. These artificial 
devices so completely sabotage capitalism that prices get out 
of phase, black markets develop and many human needs are 
neglected. This is why the United States moved so quickly 
after World War II to eliminate price controls and rationing. 
Both are inimical to a healthy capitalist economy. France 
and England failed to follow suit but Western Germany did. 
As a result, the recovery of Western Germany was one of the 
sensations of the post-war period, while the recovery of France 
and England was extremely slow and painful. 


4. FREEDOM TO FAIL 


Last of all, we come to the freedom which harbors in its 
bosom the golden secret of all successful capitalist economies. 
This is the freedom to fail. Under free enterprise Capitalism 
every businessman who wishes to survive must do a lot of long 
term research as well as make a continuous study of his cur- 
rent operation. Services must be continually improved, waste 
must be eliminated, efficiency in operations must be constantly 
pushed. And all of this is simply to keep the individual or 
company from failing. Occasionally we find a businessman, 
whose neck may be new to the yoke, refusing to extend him- 
self in order to meet the competition of others who are more 
alert, more aggressive, more anxious to serve and more ac- 


The Naked Communist 


commodating. This newcomer has a lesson to learn. Perhaps, 
without quite realizing it, he is exercising his freedom to fail. 

In some vanned economies a well-established business is 
not allowed to fail because it is described as “essential” to the 
economy. Therefore, if the product of that company will not 
sell at a profit, it is subsidized from taxes to make up the differ- 
ence. The company thereby receives a bonus for its ineffi- 
ciency. No lesson is learned. The expressed choice to fail is not 
allowed to result in failure. Other companions soon follow. 
Almost immediately inertia replaces energy. Progress is 
slowed to a snail’s pace and human needs are no longer ade- 
quately satisfied. 

In a dynamic capitalist economy the fact that a person or 
company will be allowed to fail is the very thing which spurs 
the individual or company to succeed. Of course, those who do 
fail are cushioned in their fall so that they do not starve nor 
do they lose their opportunity to try again. Nevertheless, the 
cushion is not a dole nor a stipend which would be so comfort- 
able that the person would want to relax and stay down. 
Capitalist cushions are thin — by design. 


How Capitalism 

Makes Things Plentiful and Cheap 

It was Marx’s dream to produce everything in such over- 
whelming abundance and distribute goods so freely that no 
one would need to buy and therefore no one would be able to 
sell. Unfortunately for Marx, his economic dream was doomed 
from the start because instead of producing goods in over- 
whelming abundance. Socialism and Communism were found 
to stymie production and smother invention. Therefore, it 
has remained the task of free enterprise Capitalism to push 
mankind toward the economic millennium of a fully abundant 
material life. 

An excellent example of how this is being accomplished 
is taken from a personal observation of Dr. George S. Benson 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


of Harding College. He says: “In China I burned kerosene 
carried a hundred miles on the shoulders of a coolie. He 
owned his means of transportation, he owned a bamboo pole 
and a scrap of rope on each end of it, and he’d tie a five gallon 
tin of kerosene to either end of the pole and trot along back 
into the interior. He traveled over a little, single-file trail that 
nobody kept up, that wound its way between the rice fields 
in the valleys and then over the hills. He could make about 
ten miles a day with that burden. 

“How much was he paid? Suppose he had been paid 
$5.00 a day. In ten days he’d have earned $50.00. But what 
would he have accomplished? He’d have transported ten 
gallons of kerosene a hundred miles, he’d have increased the 
price of kerosene $5.00 per gallon. Of course in China nobody 
could afford to pay such a price so he was paid what the traffic 
would bear ; he was paid ten cents a day and then he added ten 
cents a gallon to the price of kerosene when carried a hundred 
miles — he doubled the price of it. 

“A miserable wage, wasn’t it? But he could do no better 
with what he had to work with. 

“Now observe how we move kerosene in America where 
there is an investment of $25,000 in cash for every job created 
—the roadbed, the steel rails, the great locomotives, the tank 
cars, the terminals, the loading facilities and so on. We move 
kerosene at less than one cent per gallon per hundred miles, 
less than a tenth of the cost in China. What do we pay our 
workmen? Seventy times what the Chinese coolie gets — and 
still give to the purchaser a freight rate of less than a tenth 
of that of a coolie. What’s the difference? Simply the in- 
vestment and management — nothing else — the result of our 
American way of life.” 

Here Dr. Benson has pinpointed another of the great 
secrets of Capitalism’s success : to put expensive tools and vast 
quantities of power at the disposal of the worker. But since 
the worker cannot afford to provide these tools for himself, 
who does? The answer is simple: frugal fellow citizens. 

These frugal fellow citizens are called capitalists. They 
are often ordinary people who are willing to scrimp and save 


The Naked Communist 


338 and store up goods and money instead of consuming or spend- 
ing them. Therefore, anyone who has savings, stocks, bonds, 
investments, insurance or property is a capitalist. In America 
this includes a remarkably high percentage of all the people. 
No doubt it would come as a great surprise to Marx if he knew 
that instead of developing a capitalist class as Marx expected, 
America is becoming a nation of capitalists. 

Each capitalist decides what venture he will sponsor with 
his money. He often risks his money in places where a gov- 
ernment agency would never risk a cent. As a result, new 
oil is found, new inventions are promoted, new industries are 
started, “impossible things” are made possible and fantastic 
benefits constantly accrue to humanity. 

Of course, investing money which people have been pains- 
takingly saving through a lifetime requires that the project 
be successful so people will continue backing it with their 
savings. This puts management under a great deal of pressure 
to cut expenses and get the product out at a price that will 
make it sell “in quantity.” Management therefore constantly 
demands more efficient machines which in turn permit the 
worker to spend fewer hours on the job. The little book called 
The Miracle of America points out that this free enterprise 
system has : 

1. Increased the real wages of American workers ( wages 
in relation to prices ) to three and one-half times what 
they were in 1850. 

2. Reduced hours of work from an average of about 70 
hours a week in 1850 to around UO today. 

3. Increased the worker’s share of the national income 
paid out in wages and salaries from S8 per cent in 
1850 to about 70 per cent today. 

4. Increased the number of jobs faster than the growth 
of population, so that America has come closer to “full 
employment” than any nation in the world. 

All of this is made possible because the American worker 
is furnished expensive equipment to do the job faster and 
cheaper, and this equipment is purchased with the savings of 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


the worker’s business partner. He is the frugal fellow citi- 
zen called “the Capitalist.” 

The Law of Supply and Demand Sets the Price 


Capitalism works best in a free market where the “value” 
of goods is fixed at that point where the graph line of “supply’ 
intersects with the graph line of “demand.” For example, if 
there is an abundant supply of potatoes people lose their 
anxiety to secure potatoes and the “demand” sinks to a low 
level. Even so, however, there is a level at which demand 
will establish itself and that is what “fixes” the price. 

Several years ago, unexpected circumstances resulted in a 
threatened potato famine. The government made the mis- 
take of interfering on the assumption that if it did not inter- 
fere the price of potatoes would shoot sky high and people 
of modest means could not buy them. It was considered “so- 
cially desirable” to peg the price of potatoes at a low level. 
But what happened? With a short supply and an unnatural, 
low price it was only a matter of a few weeks until the entire 
stock was exhausted and nobody could buy potatoes at any 
price. Here is why Socialism or human control of the economy 
stifles Capitalism and destroys the “natural” laws by which 
it has so successfully blessed mankind. 

If the Government had left the market alone the price 
of potatoes would have gone up to that point where demand 
would have carried it. The higher price would have provided 
an “automatic” control of consumption and would have made 
the supply of potatoes last much longer because people would 
have considered it economically necessary to use fewer pota- 
toes. They would have gradually begun to buy substitutes 
which were in surplus and therefore cheaper. By this means 
the price factor would have helped people limit their con- 
sumption of stocks which were scarce while increasing the 
consumption of stocks which were plentiful. 

All this was turned topsy-turvy when the Government 
thought it would be "socially desirable” to peg potato prices. 


The Naked Communist 


340 ^ no ^ onl y turned out to be unnatural but also impractical. 

This brings us to our final comment on free enterprise. 

Failure of an American Experiment 
with Socialism 


One of the most impressive modern documents on Ameri- 
can free enterprise in action is a dynamic little book by Ezra 
Taft Benson, former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, entitled, 
Farmers at the Cross Roads. It verifies with facts and figures 
the lesson our generation has learned from an experiment 
with Socialism through Government control of agriculture. 

The Government attempted to control farm prices by 
direct control of farm practices. The so-called “basic crops” 
which were put under controls were wheat, cotton, corn, rice, 
tobacco and peanuts. The idea was to protect the farmer by 
guaranteeing him a certain minimum price. To do this it 
was necessary to control production. Farmers were therefore 
restricted as to the amount of acreage they could plant. 

The results were amazing. Take wheat for example. 
More than 30 million acres were taken out of wheat produc- 
tion in an attempt to reduce the supply and thereby maintain 
a good price for wheat. Each wheat farmer received a Gov- 
ernment check which paid him for not planting wheat on a 
certain percentage of his land. This is what happened : 

The farmer used the money to buy better machinery, more 
fertilizer and additional help so that frequently he harvested 
as much or more wheat from his limited acreage than he had 
previously raised on his entire farm. In other words, cur- 
tailed acreage did not curtail production. 

Furthermore, land taken out of wheat production could 
be used to raise other crops which resulted in an over-supply of 
feed grains. Feed grain prices went so low that farmers and 
ranchers were able to greatly increase their cattle and hog 
production. This pulled the rug out from under meat prices. 

The government tried to save the situation by purchasing 


Free Enterprise Capitalism 


large quantities of each product which was being overpro- 
duced. This, coupled with price supports, encouraged even 
more people to invest in farming with the result that vast 
areas of sub-marginal land were opened up for production. 
Many of these investors were not farmers at all, and these 
made a loud noise in favor of higher supports when they could 
not make their inefficiently operated farms pay off. 

The Government’s support of artificial high prices also 
had another destructive influence. It encouraged customers 
to look around for substitute products or foreign imports. As 
a result, American farmers not only lost some of their domestic 
markets, but found they were unable to compete abroad. 

What happened to wheat also happened to cotton and the 
other “basic crops.” They lost markets everywhere. In the 
case of cotton the government reduced acreage from 43 mil- 
lion acres to 17.4 million. Still the surplus quantities con- 
tinued to climb. Before controls, U.S. cotton farmers exported 
7 million bales of cotton per year. During 1955 they sold 
only 2 million bales abroad. Foreign cotton growers saw what 
was happening and doubled their sales because U.S. cotton 
brokers could not compete. So it was with all controlled areas 
of U.S. agriculture. 

In contrast to this, we find that those areas of agriculture 
which resisted rigid price guarantees did better. Take soybean 
farming as an example. These producers used the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture to advise and counsel them but not to 
control. The Department of Agriculture conducted numer- 
ous experiments to reveal new uses for soybeans and 
encouraged producers to use cooperative associations for the 
exploring of new markets. Today, soybean farmers supply 
half the tonnage for high protein feeds — twice as much as that 
which comes from cottonseed meal. Soybeans have risen to 
fifth place as the farmer’s greatest source of farm income. Sec- 
retary Benson closes with this significant comment: “A major 
difference between cotton and soybeans is the fact that cotton 
decided to fight its battles in the legislative halls, while soy- 
beans decided to fight in the market place.” 

These are merely a few highlights from the lessons which 


The Naked Communist 


America should have learned during the past twenty-five years 
of experimentation with socialized agriculture. There are 
many things which the Government can do to encourage the 
“general welfare” of all agriculture as it did with soybeans, 
but to try to control prices by Washington edicts rather than 
by supply and demand in the market place proves to be the 
kiss of death for the handsome goose that lays the golden eggs 
of American free enterprise prosperity. 

It is time to sell ourselves on our own economic program 
so we can more effectively share it with the rest of the world. 
We have a great system which is operating with demonstrable 
efficiency. Here is a summary of what it is doing: 

1. Capitalism is by far the best known system to provide 
for the physical needs of man. 

2. Capitalism permits man to satisfy his spiritual needs. 

3. Capitalism allows for variation as between individuals. 

4. Capitalism is naturally self-expanding which tends to 
create strong economic ties between communities, 
states and nations. 

5. Capitalism can permit everyone to participate in mak- 
ing a profit, thereby eliminating classes or castes 
which are inherent in so many other types of economies. 

6. Capitalism promotes the “freedom to try.” 

7. Capitalism allows the “freedom to sell.” 

8. Capitalism allows the “freedom to buy.” 

9. Capitalism preserves the greatest single force of hu- 
man motivation — the risk of failing. 

10. Capitalism tends to increase the wages of workers in 
relation to prices. 

11. Capitalism tends to reduce the hours of work necessary 
to make a living. 

12. Capitalism increases the workers’ share of the national 
income. 

13. Capitalism increases the number of jobs faster than 
the growth of population. 

14. Capitalism promotes rapid technological advances. 

15. Capitalism is proving to be the most effective means 
mankind has yet discovered for “sharing the wealth.” 



4 

Did the Early Christians 
Practice Communism? 

A few students have secretly or even openly defended 
Communism because they considered it to be an important set 
of principles practiced by the early Christians. Such persons 
often say that they definitely do not condone the ruthlessness 
of Communism as presently practiced in Russia, but that they 
do consider it to be of Christian origin and morally sound 
when practiced on a “brotherhood basis.” 

This was exactly the attitude of the Pilgrim Fathers 
when they undertook to practice Communism immediately 
after their arrival in the New World. But as we have seen 
earlier, not only did the project fail miserably, but it was 
typical of hundreds of other attempts to make Communism 
work on a “brotherhood basis.” Without exception all of 
them failed. One cannot help wondering why. 

Certain scholars feel they have verified what Governor 
Bradford has said concerning “brotherhood Communism,” 
namely, that it is un-Christian and immoral because it strikes 
at the very roots of human liberty. Communism — even on a 


The Naked Communist 


344 brotherhood basis — can only be set up under a dictatorship 
administered within the framework of force or fear. Governor 
Bradford found this to be true. Leaders in literally hundreds 
of similar experiments concur. Students are therefore return- 
ing to ancient texts with this question : “Did the early Chris- 
tians really practice Communism?’’ 

The belief that the early Christians may have practiced 
Communism is based on two passages. Here is the first one: 

“And all that believed were together, and had all 
things common; and sold their possessions and goods, 
and parted them to all men as every man had need.” 
(Acts 2:44-45) 

Two things might be noted here. First, the people formed 
a community effort by coming together ; second, they sold their 
possessions and goods as they appeared to need cash proceeds 
for the assistance of their fellow members. It does not say 
that they sold all their possessions and goods although it is 
granted that at first reading this may be inferred. Neither 
does it say that they pooled their resources in a common fund 
although this has been assumed from the statement that they 
“had all things common.” 

What they actually did is more clearly stated in the second 
passage which is often quoted : 

“And the multitude of them that believed were of 
one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them that 
ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but 
they had all things common.” (Acts 4:32) 

Here we have a declaration indicating that the common 
effort was not a legal pooling of resources in a communal 
fund but rather a feeling of unity in dealing with common 
problems so that no man “said” his possessions were his own 
but developed and used them in such a way that they would 
fill the needs of the group as well as himself. 

That this is a correct reading of this passage may be veri- 
fied by events which are described in the next chapter of Acts. 
There we read of Ananias and Sapphira. They had a 


Christianity and Communism 


piece of property which they decided to sell. They intended 
to give the proceeds to the Apostle Peter. But the author of 
Acts says that when they had sold the property they decided 
to hold back some of the proceeds even though they repre- 
sented to Peter that their contribution was the entire value of 
the property received at the sale. For this deceit Peter 
severely criticized them and then, in the process, he explained 
the legal relationship existing between these two people and 
their property. Said he, “While it (the property) remained, 
was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it ( the money) 
not in thine power?" (Acts 5:4) 

In other words, this property had never been required 
for any communal fund. It belonged to Ananias and Sapphira. 
It was completely in their power. After the property was 
sold the money they received from the sale was also in their 
power. They could spend it or contribute it. If contributed, 
the money was a freewill, voluntary offering. It will be 
seen immediately that this is altogether different from a 
Communist’s relationship to property where there is a con- 
fiscation or expropriation of each member’s possessions, and 
the proceeds are distributed by a single person or a small 
committee. The member thereby loses his independence and 
becomes subservient to the whims and capriciousness of those 
who rule over him. 

It would appear, therefore, that the early Christians did 
keep legal title to their property but “said” it was for the 
benefit of the whole community. 

This is precisely the conclusion reached in Dummelow’s 
Bible Commentary. It discusses the two passages we have 
just quoted and then says: “The Church of Jerusalem recog- 
nized the principle of private property. A disciple’s property 
really was his own, but he did not say it was his own; he 
treated it as if it were common property.” 

Dr. Adam Clarke’s commentary also makes this signifi- 
cant observation concerning the Apostolic collections for the 
poor : “If there has been a community of goods in the Church, 
there could have been no ground for such (collections) . . . 
as there could have been no such distinction as rich and poor, 


The Naked Communist 


if every one, on entering the Church, gave up his goods to a 
common stock.” 

This, then, brings us to our final comment on this subject, 
namely, that the Master Teacher made it very clear in one of 
his parables (Matthew 25:14-30) that property was not to be 
owned in common nor in equal quantities. 

In this parable he said the members of the Kingdom of 
God were as servants who had been given various steward- 
ships “every man according to his several ability.” One man 
was given a stewardship of five talents of silver and when he 
“traded with the same and made them other five talents,” his 
Lord said, “Well done!” However, another servant who had 
been given only one talent of silver feared he might somehow 
lose it, so he buried it in the earth. To this man his Lord 
said, “Thou wicked and slothful servant!” He then took this 
man’s one talent and gave it to the first servant where it could 
be developed profitably. 

Two things appear very clear in this Parable of the 
Talents: first, that every man was to enjoy his own private 
property as a stewardship from God. Second, that he was 
responsible to the earth’s Creator for the profitable use of his 
property. 

All of the evidence before us seems to clearly show that 
the early Christians did not practice Communism. They did 
not have their property in common. Instead, they had their 
problems in common. To solve their problems, each man was 
asked to voluntarily contribute according to his ability “as 
God had prospered him.” (1 Corinthians 16:2) 

When carefully analyzed, this was simply free enterprise 
capitalism with a heart! 

The student will also probably recognize that whenever 
modern capitalism is practiced “with a heart” it showers bles- 
sings of wealth, generosity, good will and happy living on 
every community it touches. 

The ancient Christian order was a great idea. 



5 

What is the Secret Weapon of Communism? 

(This is the text of a speech delivered May 6, 1953, to 1150 guests at 
the annual banquet of the Washington State Parent Teachers As- 
sociation. At the time this speech was given the author was serving 
on the faculty of the Brigham Young University.) 

One hundred years ago there was a little school of philoso- 
phers in Europe who called themselves “pure materialists.” 
They had their headquarters in Germany. Two of those 
materialists carved a place for themselves in history. Through 
their speeches and books they lighted a flame which, in a 
century, has created more distrust, insecurity, bloodshed, 
war-mongering and destruction of property than all the crimi- 
nal and gangster elements in the world combined. 

One of these men was Frederick Wilhelm Nietzsche. It 
was Nietzsche who rose up out of the school of pure mater- 
ialism to advance the idea of a superman. His ideas could be 
summarized as follows : “Since there is not any God and since 
human beings are only graduate beasts without any souls and 
without immortality, men should not therefore follow a sys- 


The Naked Communist 


tem of ethics and morals. The natural law of force should 
prevail in the universe. The weak deserve to serve, the strong 
deserve to rule. Somewhere on the earth there is a nation 
which is just naturally superior and which should ruthlessly 
subdue the rest of mankind. Within that nation a single in- 
dividual should rise up as the natural leader and dictator to 
rule over humanity because he is a superman.” It was Niet- 
zsche who made up Superman, not the comics. 


Who Inspired, Hitler? 

Now it was Nietzsche’s thinking which inspired Adolf 
Hitler with his apocalyptic nightmare of total war. Hitler 
envisioned himself as the man of destiny — the superman — who 
would one day rule the world. When Hitler wrote Mein 
Kampf it was as though Nietzsche were speaking from the 
dead. Said Hitler, “Look at these young men and boys ! What 
material ! I shall eradicate the thousands of years of human 
domestication. Brutal youth — that is what I am after ... I 
want to see once more in its eyes the gleam ... of the beast of 
prey. With these I can make a new world . . . and create a 
new order!” 

Mankind felt the crushing, brutal impact of Hitler’s mam- 
moth war machine during World War II as he forced millions 
to join his ranks of imperialistic conquest which was designed 
to make him dictator of the world. In this country we watched 
in amazement as he rose to power. Finally, after several years 
of seeing the black boots of National Socialism stomp out the 
light of civilization wherever they marched, we rose up in our 
wrath and joined forces with other nations of the world to 
smash Nietzsche-inspired Nazism. 

However, the spirit of total war which was spawned by 
the materialists was not confined to the National Socialists in 
Germany. It had been projected into the ambitions and philos- 
ophies of the leaders of several nations. It was codi- 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


fled into the political aims of the military leaders of Japan 
and Italy who also collapsed under the mighty blow which 
struck down National Socialism. 

However, with the ending of World War II, many people 
felt that the conflict with materialism was at an end. Almost 
immediately the spirit of sacrifice seemed to wither within us. 
Virtually overnight our armies were demobilized, the world’s 
largest air force was practically scrapped, and the world’s 
largest navy was put into mothballs. All this was on the pre- 
sumption that the war with materialism was finished. Time, 
of course, proved this presumption to be a mistake. 

In putting down National Socialism and the Axis we had 
only conquered one form of materialism. Another form, 
equally strong, immediately rose to take its place. This new 
form of materialism came from Nietzsche’s comrade-in-arms 
— Karl Marx — a man out of the same school of philosophy, with 
the same motivations as Nietzsche. Karl Marx thought of 
himself as the father of dialectical materialism, more common- 
ly known as Communism. Today, the great force of conquest 
and imperialism which he envisioned stands arrayed against 
the people of the free world and marches under the banner 
of the hammer and sickle. 


What Was the Mission of Karl Marx? 

Some people have mistaken the mission of Karl Marx and 
his followers as purely economic in nature, but like all other 
materialists their mission was to gain power through ideo- 
logical warfare. Note how they denounced any competitive 
ideology, even religion: “We must combat religion — this is 
the ABC of materialism, and consequently of Marxism .” 1 And 
another disciple declared that when they took over, “God will 
be banished from the laboratories as well as from the schools .” 2 

Now since we are dealing with the field of ideological war- 
fare, one might well ask, What is the objective of these militant 


1 Lenin, V. “RELIGION,” p. U. 

2 Foster , William Z., “towards soviet AMERICA,” p. 316. 


The Naked Communisf 


atheists? What are they trying to set up as the new ideal for 
human relations? Listen to the words of Lenin: 

“We must hate — hatred is the basis of Communism. Chil- 
dren must be taught to hate their parents if they are not Com- 
munists.” And listen to the amazing declaration of the former 
Russian Commissar of Education, Anatole Lunarcharsky : “We 
hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best of them must 
be considered our worst enemies. Christian love is an obstacle 
to the development of the revolution. Down with love of one’s 
neighbor ! What we want is hate . . . Only then will we con- 
quer the universe!” 3 

I am sure you would agree that when men like these rise 
to positions of power in the earth it is indeed a challenge to 
the youth of the free world. When Karl Marx was asked what 
his object in life was, he said, “To dethrone God and destroy 
capitalism !” 

In a declared war against morals, ethics, and spiritual 
values among the people, Marx and his associates resolved to 
completely eliminate the worship of the Almighty among men. 
Heinrich Heine declared : “Our hearts are filled with compas- 
sion for it is . . . Jehovah Himself who is making ready to die,” 4 
and Nietzsche, so successful in the atheistic campaign, said : 
let the “death of God” be boldly proclaimed. 5 Ludwig Feuer- 
bach announced that: “The turning point of history will be 
the moment man becomes aware that the only God of man is 
man himself.” 1 * 


Pirates of Science and Religion 


The strategy of the materialists was to appropriate to 
themselves the toga of “science” and take credit for all scienti- 
fic accomplishments. Then they determined to ridicule and 


3 “u. S. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD,” Vol. 77, pp. 1539-157,0. 

4 “REVUE DES DEUX-MONDES,” 183 4, Vol. 4, p. 1,08. 

-Quoted, in “atheist humanist,” by Henri deLubac, p. 20 

0 Quoted m “ATHEIST humanist,” by Henri deLubac, p. 10. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


rationalize away all the things which they opposed by pro- 
nouncing them “unscientific.” Thus they attacked the Bible, 
called themselves higher critics, and attempted to explain it 
away. They explained the worship of God as being merely 
the effort of man to project the qualities of his own better 
nature into some fictitious superior being. They called Jesus 
Christ an itinerant preacher whose life and writings were ef- 
feminate and weak. They ridiculed the possibility of his re- 
surrection. They denied the immortality of human life or the 
existence of the spirit or soul. They said that man was noth- 
ing but a graduate beast and that human life — especially the 
other man’s life — was no more sacred than that of a centi- 
pede, a caterpillar, or a pig. In other words, the materialists 
turned their backs on six thousand years of human history 
and achievement. As Marx and Engels boasted in their 
Manifesto : Our program “abolishes eternal truths ; it abolishes 
all religion, and all morality ... it therefore acts in contradic- 
tion to all past historical experience.” 


Men Who Worship Themselves 

But having denounced God, the scriptures, morals, im- 
mortality, eternal judgment, the existence of the spirit, and 
the sanctity of individual human life, the materialists turned 
to worship themselves. They decided that man, collectively 
speaking, was the epitome of perfection among nature’s 
achievements and therefore the center of the universe. This 
gave Nietzsche an excellent opportunity to teach his concept 
of “superman.” As Nietzsche exalted himself and all other 
men as the most superior of all existing things he burst forth 
into statements like this: “Now this God (of the Bible) is 
dead ! You higher men, this God was your greatest danger. . . . 
Do you understand this saying, Oh my brothers? You are 
frightened? Do your hearts fail you? Does the abyss yawn 
at your feet? . . . What of it? Forward, higher men! Now at 


The Naked Communist 


last the mountain of man’s future is about to give birth. God 
is dead; now it is our will that superman shall live!” 7 

In the egotistical tunnel vision of these men who sought 
to dethrone God there flamed the phantom hope that somehow 
they may have made the discovery of the ages. Nietzsche 
made a studied attempt to assume the proper humility which 
he felt was becoming to such a genius as himself. Said he, 
“Great heavens ! Who has any idea of the burden that weighs 
upon me and the strength that it takes to endure myself! I 
don’t know why it should fall upon me of all people — but it 
may be that I am the first to light upon an idea which will 
divide the history of mankind in two. ... It takes some cour- 
age to face that thought.” 

The Fruits of Materialism 


But it took more courage than Nietzsche realized. His 
writings groaned with the burden: “Since there ceased to be 
a God, loneliness has become intolerable.” But then he bol- 
stered his timidity by reminding himself that after all he was 
a superman and resolved that he, as “the man who overtops 
the rest must set to work.” 8 

But if there is no God, no design, and nothing for the fu- 
ture but an accidental destiny, what is there to work for? In 
the dark hours of his anti-theistic reasoning and just a short 
time before he went insane, Nietzsche could not help asking 
himself: “How did we come to do that? How did we manage 
to empty the sea? Who gave us a sponge to wipe out the 
whole horizon? What were we about when we undid the 
chain which linked this earth to the sun? . . . Are we not 
wandering through an endless nothingness? Do we not feel 
the breath of the void in our faces? Isn’t it growing colder? 
Is not night always coming on, one night after another, more 
and more?” 9 


7 Quoted in “atheist humanist,” by Henri deLubac, p. 26. 

8 Quoted in “atheist humanist,” by Henri deLubac, p. 25. 

9 Quoted in “atheist humanist,” by Henri deLubac, pp. 23-2U. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


Such was the final, fearful lamentation of the men who 
started the chain-reaction of pure materialism. 

Now we have reached an interesting point in the his- 
tory of the United States when the word “Communism” has 
become universally unpopular. If the label of Communism is 
placed upon a person or an institution it may bring ruin 
overnight. The disgraceful conduct of Communist leaders has 
given their name a deep-dyed stigma in the United States. 

Communists without Labels 


But how many Americans could recognize a Communist 
without his label? What does a Communist really believe? 
Most people identify Communism as “state-ownership of 
property” or Socialism. It is interesting, however, that the 
economics of Communism are primarily for propaganda pur- 
poses. The idea of sharing the wealth appeals to the masses. 
However, when the Communists took over in Russia you will 
recall that the first thing they did was impose upon the Rus- 
sian people a form of economics which we got rid of back in 
the feudal days. It is a system where a privileged few dispense 
the necessities of life to the serfs who work for them and rely 
upon them for protection and leadership. 

But if Communist economics are primarily propaganda, 
what, then, does the Communist believe? 

In the interest of time I have endeavored to reduce the 
basic belief of these people to four fundamental concepts 
which turn out to be the basis for their philosophy. These be- 
liefs are the heart and soul of dialectical materialism. They 
pretend to provide a complete explanation for the whole uni- 
verse. They provide the reasoning which gives an excuse to 
the Communist for his revolutionary violence and amoral 
conduct. They are the things which convert a few intellectual 
people to this foreign ideology, and they are the things which 
even make a few wealthy people think that Communism is the 
last great hope of the modern world. Understanding these 


The Naked Communist 


beliefs helps to evaluate the actions of the Communists when 
we sit down with them to discuss world problems. 

First Major Premise of Communism 

Their first major premise is this: “Everything in exis- 
tence came about as a result of ceaseless motion among the 
forces of nature.” Everything is a product of accumulated 
accident. There is no design. There is no law. There is no 
God. There is only force, the force of nature. Force is right, 
force is good, force is natural. 

The idea of “dialectics” as propounded by the Communist 
intellectual is that “conflict in nature” is the womb of all 
creation; that out of fierce, writhing forces in the elements 
we obtained all that now is — stars, solar system, plants, ani- 
mals and the intelligence of man. 

When these dialectical materialists first tried to tell me 
that everything in the universe was the result of force and 
accident, I could not help but recall the teachings of my high 
school chemistry professor who said that the major premise 
of science is a recognition of the fact that there is order in the 
universe resulting from intelligent design. He pointed out 
that the mission of the scientist is to explore and discover the 
engineering principles followed by the Master Architect so 
that these can be used as a blessing for mankind. In other 
words, the very foundation of science is the recognition of an 
intelligent designer who used principles which we ourselves 
can discover and use. 

The followers of Marx are so desperately anxious to over- 
throw the recognition of God that they have denied that there 
is any design in the universe. They refuse to admit that there 
is order, law, or an intelligent creator behind the phenomena 
of nature. They say all of these things are the product of ac- 
cumulated accident. I wonder what my chemistry professor 
would say to that? These materialists claim to glorify the 
name of science and to march under its banner, but, in their 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


anxiety to discredit and repudiate God, they have openly 
denied the very things which science has demonstrated. 


Second, Major Premise 


Now here is their second major premise: “Human beings 
are only graduate beasts,” and therefore human life is no more 
sacred than that of a centipede, a caterpillar or a pig. The 
completely reckless disregard for human life is the most strik- 
ing, single characteristic of “materialism in action.” For 
many Americans, the things which were experienced in the 
Korean War have brought a rude awakening. It means a big 
difference when we are dealing with people who look upon 
all humanity as merely “graduate beasts.” 


Third Major Premise 


The third major premise of Communism is this: “There 
is no such thing as innate right or ivrong.” As one of their 
leaders pointedly declared, “To lie, is that wrong? Not for a 
good cause. To steal, is that wrong? Not for a good cause. 
To kill, is that wrong? Not for a good cause.” We call that 
pragmatism — that the end justifies the means. The dialecti- 
cal materialists look upon ethics and morals as superficial and 
fraudulent. V. I. Lenin declared : “The upbringing of Com- 
munist youth must not consist of all sorts of sentimental 
speeches and precepts.” And in the same volume he states 
that “Morality is that which serves to destroy the old exploit- 
ing society. . . . Communist morality is the morality which 
serves this struggle.” 1 " 

It is highly important to Communist discipline to have 
every person obey blindly. To obey blindly is considered good 
and therefore morally right. But a system of morals which 


'"Lenin, V. /., “selected works,” Vol. IX, p. .',77-1,78. 


The Haked Communist 


controls conduct in terms of right and wrong makes each in- 
dividual a moral free agent. This, Communism cannot stand. 

Fourth Major Premise 

The fourth major premise of Communism is “That all 
religion must be overthrown because it inhibits the spirit of 
world revolution.” It was the feeling of Marx, Engels and 
their fellow travelers that the deep spiritual convictions of the 
people hindered their acceptance of Communist philosophy and 
Communist rule. It kept them from capturing the revolution- 
ary spirit. It kept them from lying and stealing and killing 
when leaders commanded it. As one of their writers declared : 
“Religion does not fit into a dialectical materialist system of 
thought. It is the enemy of it. One cannot be a thorough 
materialist, that is, a dialectical materialist, and have any 
remnants of religious beliefs .” 11 Marx said: “Religion is the 
opium of the people,” and as we have pointed out previously, 
it became a prime objective of the Communist Manifesto to 
overthrow “all religions.” 

The Communist founders were not satisfied to have their 
disciples merely ignore religion. They felt it was highly 
essential that religion be methodically replaced with militant 
atheism. 

One of their writers declared : “Atheism is a natural and 
inseparable part of Marxism . . . consequently, a class-con- 
scious Marxist party must carry on propaganda in favor of 
atheism.” 1 - In one of their youth magazines the following in- 
struction appeared : “If a Communist youth believes in God 
and goes to Church, he fails to fulfill his duties. This means 
that he has not yet rid himself of a religious superstition and 
has not yet become a fully conscious person .” 13 

The Communists have written volumes against religion. 


11 Browder, Earl, “communism in the united states,” p. 339. 
i- Yaroslavsky, E., “religion in the ussr,” p. 53. 

“young bolshevik,” 5- tl , 1946, p . 56. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


but this is sufficient to demonstrate that atheism and the 
rejection of all religions is a very important part of the Com- 
munist program. 

Can Communist Beliefs Hurt Us? 

So there you have the four major premises of Commu- 
nism. Some people will say, “Well, if that’s what it takes to 
make a Communist — so what? What they believe cannot hurt 
me.” Such attitudes have practically been our undoing. These 
beliefs can hurt us. For example, let me tell you briefly of an 
important event which occurred toward the conclusion of 
World War II. 

This incident began in June, 1943, when a young Russian 
by the name of Igor Gouzenko arrived by plane in Ottawa, 
Canada. He was immediately assigned to the military attache 
of the Russian Embassy as a cipher clerk. This was the first 
time Igor Gouzenko had ever been outside of Russia. He later 
wrote: “I was surprised during the first days by the com- 
plete freedom of the individual which exists in Canada, but 
which does not exist in Russia.” 14 

He observed that even during war time, the people en- 
joyed comparative freedom, that they were a happy people and 
that the government served the people rather than vice versa. 
He vicariously enjoyed their freedom just by watching them. 
As he himself said : “I saw the evidence of what a free people 
can do. What the Canadian people have accomplished and are 
accomplishing here under conditions of complete freedom, the 
Russian people, under the conditions of the Soviet Regime of 
violence and suppression of all freedom, cannot accomplish 
even at the cost of tremendous sacrifices, blood and tears.” 15 

He was impressed by the vast quantities of goods that 
were on sale in the stores and he was amazed to find they 
could be purchased by anyone. He was impressed by the lack 


14 “REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION,” 638 . 

15 “REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION,” 639 . 


The Naked Communist 


of fear and the lack of chaos, which the Russian propaganda 
machine claimed existed. Most impressive of all was the way 
democracy worked. He said: “The last elections which took 
place recently in Canada, especially surprised me. In com- 
parison with them, the system of elections in Russia appears 
as a mockery of the conceptions of free elections.”'" 


What Puzzled Gouzenko Most ? 

But while Igor Gouzenko was working for the military 
attache of the Soviet Embassy, he noticed something else. He 
observed that contact was being made with top Canadian 
scientists and sometimes with important Canadian officials. 
Often they were actually cooperating in furnishing highly 
secret Government data to the Communist military agents. 
Gouzenko was further puzzled by the fact that he knew these 
important officials and scientists were aware that the ultimate 
aim of the Communists was a world-wide revolution which 
would destroy the Canadian Government as well as all others. 

After watching these developments for a period of two 
years, Igor Gouzenko decided that he would warn the Cana- 
dian people of what was happening. Already he had made up 
his mind that he would never go back to Russia and raise his 
own child the way he had been raised. He told his wife that 
he intended to leave the Russian Embassy and warn the Can- 
adian Government of the espionage network in its midst. 

To prove his story he secreted a lot of espionage docu- 
ments in his clothing and then went to the Canadian officials. 
He thought, of course, that he would be welcomed with open 
arms — that the Canadians would be delighted to have the in- 
side story. But as he watched the expressionless face of the 
first person he contacted, Gouzenko realized he had exposed 
himself to great danger. The man did not believe him! Only 
at the last moment, when Gouzenko was actually in danger of 
being recaptured by the Russian N.K.V.D. did it finally dawn 


111 “REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION,” p. ti.i9. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


on some of the officials that perhaps this Soviet code clerk’s 
story might be true. He was therefore immediately taken into 
protective custody so he could tell his story to the world. 

Treason in High Places 

The Canadians wondered if the people named by 
Gouzenko actually would collaborate with a potential en- 
emy. The list included such men as Dr. Raymond Boyer, 
wealthy faculty member of McGill University, who was a 
senior supervisor in the National Research Council and co- 
inventor of the explosive RDX in World War II ; Eric Adams, 
graduate of McGill and Harvard, serving in a top position in 
the Industrial Development Bank; Israel Halperin, professor 
of mathematics at Queen’s University in Ontario and doing 
highly technical research for the Directorate of Artillery; 
David Gordon Lunin, editor of Canadian Affairs; Dr. David 
Shugar, employed by Research Enterprises Limited, doing ad- 
vanced research on radar; Harold Gerson, holding a top ad- 
ministrative position in the Allied War Supply; F. W. Poland, 
an officer in the Directorate of Intelligence of the Royal 
Canadian Air Force; and there was Kathleen Mary Willsher, 
who held a confidential position with the High Commissioner 
of the United Kingdom in Canada. 

These and other persons on the list were promptly ar- 
rested and investigated by a Royal Canadian Commission. This 
Commission later reported: “Perhaps the most startling 
single aspect of the entire fifth column network is the uncan- 
ny success with which the Soviet Agents were able to find 
Canadians who were willing to betray their country and to 
supply to agents of a foreign power secret information to 
which they had access — in spite of oaths of allegiance, oaths 
of office, and oaths of secrecy which they had taken ;” 17 

What the Royal Commission wanted to know was why 


1 7 “REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION,” p. 56. 


The Naked Communist 


these high Canadian officials would deliberately turn against 
the interest of their native land. They asked these people if 
they had been bribed and one of them replied, “If they had 
offered me money, I would have been insulted.” 

When the Commission inquired into the background of 
these people, they found they were casualties in the ideological 
war which is being waged between the materialists and the free 
world. These people had been raised in freedom. They had 
gone to Canadian and American schools, yet, when asked why 
they collaborated with the Soviet Agents, one of them made a 
typical reply: “I thought I was helping humanity.” 

How were these men and women, raised in a free 
world, converted by Communist agents to believe that 
if they collaborated they would be helping humanity? 
Supposing you were a scientist and one of these agents came 
to you. How would you react ? Supposing he said, “My friend, 
you know that there is no divine intelligence guiding the hu- 
man race; you know there is no Providential destiny for hu- 
manity , you know that if superior intelligences like yourself 
do not help us gain control of the human race it will destroy 
itself.” Can you even imagine yourself giving this reply: “I 
must confess that, in my heart of hearts, I do not believe that 
there is any God or divine intelligence guiding the human 
race. Therefore, I suppose I should feel it my duty as one 
of the superior intelligences of my generation— and for the 
sake of humanity — to collaborate with your movement which 
is destined to take over and save the race from itself.” 

This was not only typical of the statements which many of 
the Soviet-converted Canadians admitted making, but they 
verified their complete devotion to such ideas by deliberately 
engaging in subversive activities against their own country. 


The Secret Weapon of Communism 

Now what do we deduct from this ? Simply that these 
people were home-grown materialists! As Igor Gouzenko 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


pointed out, there is a defect in your culture when your own 
people can grow up in your midst without gaining on apprecia- 
tion of the difference between freedom and slavery, between 
idealism and atheism, between faith and doubt, or between 
order and chaos. 

Somehow we failed to provide these people with the neces- 
sary ammunition to protect them in that critical moment 
when they were contacted by the agents of a foreign ideology. 
And we should' be quick to recognize that if our culture and 
system of education is producing materialists, then this is the 
greatest secret weapon the Communists possess ! 

This means that we can spend two billion dollars develop- 
ing the atomic bomb and the Communists can sit back and 
wait until we have succeeded. Then, they can drain off the 
information from some of our top security personnel. In fact, 
that is exactly what they did. 

The greatest mistake that is being made in the free 
world today is the fact that we are mixing iron and clay. We 
are fighting for freedom but allowing some of our boys and 
girls to grow up believing in things which turn out to be 
basic Communistic concepts. Materialism is not American- 
ism but Communism. Every time we produce a boy or 
girl who is trained to believe that the universe is the product 
of accumulated accident, that human beings are only graduate 
beasts, that there is no such thing as innate right or wrong or 
that deep spiritual convictions are old-fashioned and unneces- 
sary, then we have caused a casualty among our own ranks in 
the field of ideological warfare. 

Without his ever knowing it, a young American is thereby 
trained to be a potential Red ally. This is indeed the great 
secret weapon of Communism. 


Home-Made Materialism 

Now where does an American boy or girl pick up the 
teachings of materialism? I think I can answer part of that 


The Naked Communist 


question from a personal experience in an American institu- 
tion of learning. 

I was in my second year — a sophomore — and was taking 
my first course in philosophy. One morning the Professor 
said: “Now you young people are sufficiently mature so that 
your minds should be cleansed from the barnacles of super- 
stition which probably accumulated during your youth. When 
you were children you were told about Santa Claus. Now you 
know the truth about Santa Claus. When you were children 
you were told about the stork. Now you know the truth about 
that.” He then stated that he was about to clarify our thinking 
in another field which had been cluttered up with childhood 
fairy tales. “Today,” he said, “I will tell you where the ideas 
about God came from and also about religion.” All of us sat 
back to absorb the gems of knowledge we were about to 
receive. 

“Now in the beginning,” said the professor, “men wor- 
shipped things which they created with their own hands. It 
was called idolatry. Later, men imagined that there were a 
great many unseen gods — a god of war, a god of love, a god 
of rain, etc., and all these gods required sacrifices in order to 
keep them happy. Otherwise they showed forth their wrath. 
Therefore they were frequently called gods of vengeance.” 

The professor then stated that the Bible is an excellent 
history of the evolution of religion. He said that it is clear 
from Bible study that the practice of idolatry prevailed among 
ancient peoples and that the Hebrews finally rose above it to 
worship Jehovah as a God of Vengeance. He said the people of 
Israel made sacrifices to Jehovah to keep him happy. 

“Then,” he said, “Jesus came along and declared that God 
was a God of Love possessing the attributes of all the Platonic 
ultimates. Jesus taught that God was kind, just and forgiv- 
ing. He taught the higher concepts of the Beatitudes, the 
Sermon on the Mount, and the Golden Rule.” 

“Now,” he continued, “This is the God men worship to- 
day. A God of Love as taught by Jesus. And it is good to 
go to church and worship this concept of God because it ele- 
vates the mind and stimulates the higher senses.” 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


“But,” he continued emphatically, “I want you young 
people to remember this : The idea of God is exactly like other 
human creations — like a great symphony someone has writ- 
ten, or a great poem ; you don’t have to fear God, because we 
made him up!” 

The professor finished by saying, “There is nothing 
watching over you — answering your prayers, or directing the 
human race toward some divine destiny. You young people 
are on your own.” 

As the lecture concluded, I looked around at my fellow 
classmates. On the faces of some there seemed to be an ex- 
pression of considerable relief. It was as though they were 
saying “Well, what do you know? Nobody’s watching me after 
all! So that’s what God is — something we made up — like a 
great symphony. . . .” 


Conversation between a Stvdent and a Professor 

After the class I went to the professor and said, “Doc- 
tor, have you ever had an opportunity to read the Old Testa- 
ment ?” 

“Well,” chuckled the professor, “only parts of it. I never 
had time to read all of it. But I studied the history and 
philosophy of the Bible under a well known authority.” 

The following conversation then took place between the 
student and the professor. The student told the professor 
that when he read the Bible he did not find the story in it which 
the professor said was there. The professor looked puzzled, 
“What do you mean? What story isn’t there?” 

“W ell,” said the student, “the story that religion started 
out as idolatry, evolved to the worshiping of a God of Venge- 
ance, ard then culminated in the worshiping of a God of 
Love — as taught by Jesus.” 

“Tell me,” asked the professor, “what did you find in the 
Bible?” 

The student said that as far as he was able to determine 




364 


The Naked Communist 


the nature and identity of God had been taught to men from 
the very beginning. He said he thought the Bible taught that 
God had raised up prophets and special witnesses from earliest 
times and these were each given a scientific experience so that 
they would know for themselves the nature of God and be 
able to teach it to the people. 

Then he continued, “The second thing I understood the 
Bible taught is that in the beginning God revealed a pattern for 
happy living which we call religion. He taught us not to steal, 
not to lie, not to cheat, to serve our fellow men, to remain 
morally clean. 

“Finally,” he concluded, “I thought the Bible said idolatry 
and heathen religious practices were set up to compete with 
revealed religion because a large percentage of the people 
refused to subscribe to the things God had revealed. I thought 
it said manmade religion came long after God had revealed 
His will to man and that idolatry was a substitute and degen- 
erate form of worship sponsored by men who reveled in the 
violation of God’s commandments.” 

The professor looked down at his desk for a moment and 
then said: “I am afraid you are a little naive. Religion was 
not revealed, it evolved. Certainly you will have to admit 
that Jehovah was a typical ‘God of Vengeance’ who made the 
people offer sacrifices to keep him happy.” 

“That is another thing,” the student replied. “The Bible 
does not say that the sacrifices in the Old Testament were to 
make God happy. It says that they were for the benefit of 
the people — a teaching device. Or, as Paul says, they were 
a ‘school master.’ It says that God is the same yesterday, to- 
day and forever, and that he was as much a God of Love in 
the Old Testament as he was in the New Testament.” 

“I’m afraid I will have to challenge that,” said the pro- 
fessor. “I think every authority would have to agree that 
sacrifices in the Old Testament were simply to make Jehovah 
happy.” 

The student asked, “Would you like to hear what Jehovah 
himself said about sacrifices, and what they represented in 
the Old Testament?” The professor agreed, so a copy of the 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


Bible was secured from the library. It was opened to the first 
chapter of Isaiah and the professor and student read the fol- 
lowing verses together. 


The Bible Provides Its Own Rebuttal 

“To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto 
me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, 
and the fat of fed beasts; I delight not in the blood of bullocks 
or of lambs, or of he goats. . . . Bring me no more vain obla- 
tions. ... (‘If these sacrifices were not successful in making 
better people then they apparently were in vain,’ commented 
the student.) When ye spread forth your hands, I will hide 
mine eyes from you : yea, when you make your many prayers 
I will not hear : your hands are full of blood !” 

Then the student asked the professor if he thought the 
next two or three verses reflected the personality of a so-called 
God of Vengeance or a God of Love : 

“Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your 
doing from before mine eyes! Cease to do evil; learn to do 
well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the father- 
less, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason to- 
gether, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they 
shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, 
they shall be as wool, If ye are willing and obedient, ye shall 
eat the good of the land.” ,s 

The professor was silent for a moment, and so the sopho- 
more gained the courage to ask the final, crucial question. 
“Professor, am I wrong in concluding that these passages 
reflect the same spirit as the Beatitudes, the Sermon on the 
Mount and the Golden Rule? Am I wrong in concluding that 
God has always been a God of Love?” 

The professor took the Bible, placed a card in the first 


’* Isaiah 1:11-19. 


The Naked Communist 


chapter of Isaiah and said, “Have the librarian transfer this 
Book to me.” 

The student appreciated his professor’s willingness to 
re-evaluate what he had been teaching. And he also ap- 
preciated something else — a mother and father, Sunday School 
teachers and others who had encouraged him to get acquaint- 
ed with the Bible. They did not tell him what he had to be- 
lieve out of the Bible; they just wanted him to get acquainted 
with it. He was glad that he had read it sufficiently so that 
when someone misrepresented what it said he was able to 
draw his own conclusions. 

Sometimes Students Puzzle Parents 

Now students who come home from a lecture such as the 
one I have just described are frequently an enigma to their 
parents. A boy may come home from a philosophy class, sit 
down to dinner with his family and say, “Dad, are we mono- 
ists or dualists?” His father is likely to look quizzically at the 
boy and say, “Son, eat your soup.” 

Frequently parents are unaware that their son or daugh- 
ter may be coming to grips with important philosophical prob- 
lems. Of course, some parents are deeply confused themselves 
about the fundamental values of life and therefore they find it 
difficult to give much assistance to their children when they 
first meet the challenge of materialism. 

I think my professor was sincere. He was teaching what 
he had been taught. He was teaching materialism because he 
had come to believe it was true. I am sure he would have 
been shocked if someone had told him that in the process of 
teaching materialism he was also laying the foundation for 
one of the most important concepts in Communism. If George 
Washington had been sitting in that class he would have said, 
“Professor, I think you are wrong.” Jefferson would have 
said, “You are wrong.” And Lincoln would have said, “You are 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


wrong.” Those men established this country on the premise 
that there is a Divine Intelligence guiding human destiny, a 
God in whom we can trust. They believed the Bible and the 
testimony of the witnesses who said that if we follow the 
principles taught by the prophets, we would find happiness in 
them. The founding fathers had such great confidence in 
the way of life described in the scriptures that they built the 
framework of the American Government and the principles 
for happy living which it guarantees, on the precepts and 
teachings of the Bible. 

What About Atomic-Bomb Security? 

The disclosures of Igor Gouzenko in the Canadian spy 
case taught us that freedom is not insured by atomic bombs 
alone. As long as we are teaching materialism to our boys 
and girls we stand in danger of having them grow up to be 
vulnei'able targets in the East-West war of ideologies. 

I have already quoted to you a statement by the former 
Commissioner of Education in the Soviet Union indicating that 
they despise Christian principles because “Christian love is an 
obstacle to the development of the revolution.” In fact the 
Communist leaders have indicated time and again that our 
greatest strength in resisting their efforts to conquer our 
minds with dialectical materialism is our belief and under- 
standing of the Judaic-Christian code. 

About three years ago I was invited to speak to a conven- 
tion on the West Coast. During the discussion it was pointed 
out that one of the things which the followers of Marx despise 
about the American culture is the Judaic-Christian code. So 
I asked the members of the convention, “What is this thing 
we have which frightens Communists; someone tell us what 
the Judaic-Christian code contains.” There was a long pause. 
No one wanted to suggest a definition for this part of Ameri- 
ca’s strength. Finally an elderly gentleman in the back of the 


The Naked Communist 


368 auditorium raised his hand, “Well,” he said, “I’m not sure I 
know what the Judaic-Christian code is, but I do know this — 
if they’re scared of it, I’m for it!” 


Would the Ten Commandments 
Frighten a Communist? 

In this brief discussion there is not sufficient time to 
treat the entire Judaic-Christian code, but perhaps we can 
cover part of it. The Judaic code, for example, is built pri- 
marily around the Ten Commandments. Let us discuss each 
one of them briefly and see if we can discover what there is 
about them that would frighten a Communist. 

In the first commandment God simply asks mankind to 
recognize Him as the Creator and Master Architect of the 
universe. He wants us to understand that the remarkable 
planet on which we live is not the result of accumulated acci- 
dent. The pleasant environment which we enjoy is not the 
product of fortuitous happenstance. Nor is it the result of 
ceaseless motion among the forces of nature. He wants us to 
know that all of this is a product of design and careful engi- 
neering; that it is built on a system of law and order; that He 
rules in the heavens and that all things are moving toward 
purposeful goals. 

In the second commandment God requires that we shall 
not create or worship false gods. When He has revealed his 
identity and purposes to mankind these teachings are not to be 
perverted, distorted, or changed. As we have already men- 
tioned, the dialectical materialists not only tried to destroy the 
worship of the Almighty, but they replaced the one true God 
with a false god. As one of them said, “The turning point of 
history will be when man becomes aware that the only god of 
man is man himself.” 1 " The history of the dialectical materi- 

“atheist humanism,” Henri deLubac, p. 20. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


alists will reveal that they follow the ancient pagan practice 
of worshiping one another. 

Who Has Seen God? 


Now, the Communist says, “If there is a God, show him 
to me! Have you seen God? Has your brother, your sister?” 
It is interesting to find that some of the early Communist 
leaders actually went forth in search of God, but their bio- 
graphies reveal that they went forth with a blowtorch in one 
hand and a sledge hammer in the other. They were men who 
defied the Almighty to keep himself hidden from their all- 
searching scrutiny ; and when they failed in their search, they 
returned savagely angry, convinced that since they did not find 
God, it proved that there just was not any God to find. 

To all of this the Bible gives an answer. It may be found 
in the 19th chapter of Exodus. There God points out to Moses 
that it is not difficult for him to appear before men but it is 
difficult for men to be able to stand it. He points out that 
only certain ones have been sufficiently prepared so that He 
can bring them into His presence. He told Moses that if 
men were not adequately prepared the impact of the experi- 
ence would destroy them. Moses attempted to prepare the 
people of Israel so they could enjoy the great scientific experi- 
ence which he had already received, but their preparation was 
insufficient. The Lord said “Go down. Charge the people 
lest they break through unto the Lord to gaze and many of 
them perish.”- 0 

Later on, however, some were actually allowed to ascend 
Mount Sinai and gaze. In fact, the Lord authorized Moses 
to bring up Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and seventy of the Elders 
of Israel to behold the glory of his person. These 73 men 
were not only allowed to enjoy this remarkable experience, but 
there is a record of what they saw.- 1 


-"Exodus, 19:21. 
-' Exodus 2A :9-10. 


The Naked Communist 


370 From generation to generation similar witnesses have 

been raised up. In fact the Apostle John predicted that even- 
tually every man who ever lived will see his Creator and stand 
in his presence to be judged by Him.'- 

Now you can see that the first two commandments are a 
direct contradiction of the first major premise of Communism. 
The Communist says that the universe is a product of chaos 
and accident. In the Judaic code God taught that it is a pro- 
duct of careful design ; that He is the designer, and He should 
be acknowledged as such ; that we should not attribute these 
achievements to false forces or false gods. 

How Important Is an Oath ? 

The third commandment says, “Thou shalt not take the 
name of the Lord thy God in vain.” Many people have thought 
that this merely means that the name of God should not be 
used in profanity — but this is not what frightens the materi- 
alist. There is a far deeper meaning in this commandment. 
For example, the sanctity of the judicial oath of the United 
States of America is circumscribed by this third command- 
ment in the Judaic code. 

When a man stands in a court room or appears before a 
Congressional committee and says: “I swear to tell the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,” 
he is under the injunction of the Almighty that the name of 
God is not to be taken in vain. The American founding fathers 
believed that we should hold these oaths and covenants sacred 
and conscientiously fulfill them or the judgment of the 
Almighty would hold us responsible. Honoring every oath 
taken in the name of God is a source of great strength to the 
American pattern of free government and Communists have 
leai ned that if they take this oath in vain there is a serious 

-- Ri-veliitiwi 20:12. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


penalty attached to it for “perjury.” However, even among 
loyal Americans I fear the name of God is taken in vain far 
too often. I believe — and I feel sure you would agree — that 
if each man honored every sacred promise made in the name 
of Deity our courts would provide a hundred times more jus- 
tice, our business life would be a great deal more honest and 
the administration of public affairs would be more efficient. 


The Fourth Commandment 


The fourth commandment says we shall perform all neces- 
sary labors during six days of the week, but the seventh shall 
be set aside for attending Church, serving our fellow men in 
need, and studying the word of God. These are the things 
which make the Sabbath Day a holy day. We may not appre- 
ciate it, but the followers of Marx know that it is the institu- 
tion of Sabbath-Day-worship which keeps the Hebrew and 
Christian cultures healthy. Therefore, one of the first things 
the Marxian materialists did when they came into power was 
to abolish the observance of the Sabbath Day. 

But the effectiveness of the Sabbath can also be lost by 
just simply changing it from a holy day to a holiday. 

By adopting the ancient heathen practice of using the 
Sabbath exclusively for hunting, fishing, feasting, and enter- 
taining we completely nullify its design and purpose. 

The Lord might well say, “I want you to remember this, 
in the world today I have old people, I have sick people, I have 
lonely people and poor people. My whole system depends upon 
your ministering to one another and inasmuch as you do it 
unto the least of these you do it unto me. This is my method, 
this is my pattern, this is my program. I could send angels, 
but I do not. I send you !” 

This should always be a part of the American way of life, 
but frequently we are too busy. We forget the sick and fail 
to visit our neighbors. We only go to the hospital when it is 


The Naked Communist 


the boss’s wife who is sick. To that extent the American way 
of life is destroyed, because it ignores the pattern for happy 
living on which the American social order was originally built. 


A Vacuum in the Training of Youth 

And because of our failure to reserve any part of the Sab- 
bath to study the word of God, we are rapidly becoming a 
nation of ignorant Christians. We know so little about the 
evidence which has been recorded from generation to genera- 
tion that many have no real basis for their beliefs. Somebody 
picks up a Bible, holds it aloft and says, “Fairy tales !” Then we 
are surprised when some of our young people who know very 
little about the Bible say, “Oh, is that so ! Three bears stuff, 
eh?” And the man says, “Sure, something people made up.” 

Or a boy who has been raised in a Christian home but is 
entirely unfamiliar with the proof found in the Bible comes 
back from school some evening completely confused. At fam- 
ily devotions his father asks him to say grace and he says, 
“No, Dad, I don’t want to.” Later his father talks to him and 
says, “Son, what’s the matter? What’s happened?” And the 
boy may reply, “Well, Dad, I don’t like to pray to something 
we made up — something like a piece of music or a poem. I 
just found out that we made God up.” 

It is really quite a simple thing to destroy the beliefs of a 
boy or girl when they are not supported by a knowledge of the 
evidence which proves the validity of such beliefs. 


Are Elderly People Important? 

The fifth commandment was designed by God to sustain 
the integrity of the family. In it the Lord commanded : “Honor 
thy father and thy mother.” 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


Life is a strange combination of circumstances. When 
children are tiny, helpless and dependent, their parents are in 
a position to give them love or abuse, nourishment or neglect, 
depending upon their inclinations. In later years those same 
parents may feel the ravages of time and become as little 
children themselves. Then it is their offspring who are in a 
position to love or neglect, depending upon their inclinations. 

So, God was wise. He counseled children to honor their 
parents and parents to honor their children. Each in their 
time are dependent upon the other. 

Strong family solidarity is part of our religious strength 
and part of our national strength, but it is despised by the 
materialist. Marx and Engels wrote in their Manifesto that 
they stood for “the abolition of the family.” Immediately 
after the revolution, Lenin attempted to wipe out the family 
pattern of life, but social disease and social disorder forced 
the regime to reverse itself. 


What About Communist Purges ? 

The sixth commandment says, “Thou shalt not kill.” The 
Mosaic code made the sanctity of human life extremely impor- 
tant. That is why a person who believes and practices the 
Judaic-Christian code does not make a good Communist. He 
will not kill on command. He cannot believe that a cause is 
just which depends upon blood purges, concentration camps, 
and cruel exploitation of human life for its existence. 

This explains why we have such statements as this from 
Joseph Stalin: “Have we suppressed the reactionary clergy? 
Yes, we have. The unfortunate thing is that it has not been 
completely liquidated. Anti-religious propaganda is a means 
by which the complete liquidation of the reactionary clergy 
must be brought about. Cases occur when certain members of 
the party hamper the complete development of anti-religious 
propaganda. If such members are expelled it is a good thing 


The Naked Communist 


because there is no room for such Communists in the ranks of 
the party .” 23 


Significance of Marital Integrity 


The seventh commandment says, “Thou shall not commit 
adultery.” Fundamentally the strength of the American home 
is rooted in an exchange of confidence between a mother and 
father, between parents and children. God might well say 
to us. “I give you nothing except that which is for your ulti- 
mate happiness. My commandments are not to take away 
happiness but to preserve it. I w'ant you to be able to be 
honest with each other in your marriage covenants. If you 
want a happy family, if you want to share complete confidence 
with your mate, then thou shalt not commit adultery.” 

And moral integrity does not begin with marriage. It 
finds its strength in careful self-discipline over the years. 
When two young people come to the marriage altar, I do not 
personally know of any greater insurance for a life of happi- 
ness and trust than for each of them to be able to say in their 
hearts as they kneel together, “Even before I knew you I 
honored you and kept myself circumspect for you.” As a law 
enforcement officer I learned that when young people approach 
marriage with this spirit of devotion and personal discipline, 
then purity, peace and happy families are usually the result. 

The Thief and the Character Assassin 

The eighth commandment says, “Thou shalt not steal.” 
The Communist commandment says, “Thou shalt not get 
caught stealing.” 

The ninth commandment says, “Thou shalt not bear false 
witness.” Igor Gouzenko stated that the national pastime in 
his native land is tearing down the man just above you so you 


23 Stalin, Joseph, “leninism,” Vol. I, p. 387. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


can take his place after he is discredited and gone. In our 
country we have a few people like that but it is not the 
American Way. One of the favorite Communist tricks is 
character assassination. American boys and girls should be 
taught that when they work for a man they should try and be 
loyal to him. Surely he is just a human being and he will have 
his faults, but he should be supported in every good thing he 
is trying to do. This is what builds communities. It builds 
industry, it builds schools. It builds a nation. 

The Sanctity of Work 

Then last of all we come to the tenth commandment which 
says we should gain wealth through our own industry. If we 
see a house, a car, or something else which another man owns, 
we are not supposed to sit down and try to figure out how we 
can cheat him out of them. That is what God calls, “Coveting 
our neighbor’s goods.” Instead, we should go out and work 
for the things we desire. 

To desire good things and work for them is not a sin, but 
to acquire them by cheating or exhorting them from a neighbor 
is. While God says to respect the property of others, the 
materialists have taught for over a century that the object 
of human existence is the acquisition of loot and power; that 
the strong man should never be content, never be satisfied; 
whatever good thing the other man has he should want it 
and strive to obtain it. The gaining of spoils, the accumula- 
tion of others’ wealth and the concentration of power has 
been their constant goal. 


The Christian Code 

Last of all may I say just a few words about the Christian 
Code. Here are additional principles which — if understood 
and practiced — prevent a person from being a good Commu- 


The Naked Communist 


nist. As I go down the list see if you can determine why the 
former Soviet Commissioner of Education would say, “We 
hate Christians and Christianity.” 

Here are a number of concepts typical of the teachings of 
Jesus : 

DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU. 24 

BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS. 25 

IT IS BETTER TO GIVE THAN TO RECEIVE. 26 

DO NOT HATE YOUR ENEMIES BUT DO GOOD UNTO THEM. 21 

BE AS HUMBLE AND TEACHABLE AS A LITTLE CHILD. 26 

BE WISE, AGGRESSIVE AND ALERT TO PROMOTE GOOD AND 
PRESERVE PEACE. 29 

PERFECT YOURSELF BY OVERCOMING PERSONAL WEAK- 
NESSES. 20 

FOLLOW THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD TO INCREASE THE 
VALUE OF YOUR LIFE AND BLOT OUT THE SCARS OF PAST 
MISTAKES. 31 

THE GREATEST HAPPINESS COMES THROUGH THE GREATEST 
SERVICE. 32 

DO GOOD SECRETLY AND GOD — WHO SEETH IN SECRET — WILL 
REWARD YOU OPENLY. 33 

Christianity also teaches that we are responsible to God 
for our daily conduct, even for our thoughts. 3 ' It also teaches 
the reality of human immortality and the resurrection. We 
are given the scientific declaration of Paul, Peter, Mary Mag- 

24 Matthew 7 :12. 

'-•Matthew 5:9. 

-“Acts 20:3 5. 

27 Matthew 5:44. 

26 Matthew 13: 4 . 

-■‘Matthew 10 : 10 . 

30 Matthew 5:1,3. 

31 Luke 21,:. ',7; Acts 2:13. 

32 Luke 10:29-37. 

33 Matthew 0:1,. 

34 Galatians 6:7; Matthew 5:28. 


Secret Weapon of Communism 


dalene, the eleven Apostles and five-hundred members of the 
Church who saw the resurrected Christ. It is good to know 
that after we pass from this life we too will eventually receive 
a perfected physical embodiment. 

In his teachings Jesus affirmed what the prophets had 
taught — that beyond this life we will launch forward into an- 
another great pattern of existence. He taught that our next 
estate has been carefully engineered and will allow us a great 
variety of new experiences as we pass upward along the end- 
less corridors of the future. 

Like the Judaic Code these Christian principles give great 
strength to any free people. It is not difficult to understand 
why Communists seek to discredit these concepts. On the 
other hand, if we teach our children that there is no God, that 
men are only graduate beasts, that the end justifies the means, 
and that religious convictions are not scientific, then we will 
hear a resounding “Amen” from across the ocean. 


A New Dynamic Trend in Education 

In closing let me say that I have never had a more thrill- 
ing experience than that which has come to me during the 
past year-and-a-half while serving on the faculty of Brigham 
Young University. I have been permitted to participate in 
a pattern of education where several thousand students are 
being taught citizenship along with their scholarship; where 
science, philosophy, and religion all find their proper places 
in the personalities of these boys and girls. I get a great satis- 
faction watching these young people crossing the campus, 
loaded down with their textbooks — chemistry, physics, fine 
art, geology, sociology, history, economics, political science — 
and mixed in among those textbooks you will generally find 
a copy of the Bible. A great variety of religious subjects is 
offered to the student and he may chose those in which he 
has the most interest. 

Across the country many universities are building chapels 


The Naked Communist 


378 and emphasizing religious participation. They are doing it 
because there is an increased appreciation that this is a most 
important part of the American ideal and the source for much 
of our strength. 

Each Tuesday on the BYU campus approximately 5,000 
students voluntarily attend the weekly devotional where they 
have a chance to catch the inspiration of some of the finest 
religious leaders in the nation. 

If the challenge to our youth today is a war of ideologies, 
then it is time for us to take the offensive. We should not sit 
back and wait for our boys and girls to be indoctrinated with 
materialistic dogma and thereby make themselves vulnerable 
to a Communist conversion when they are approached by the 
agents of force and fear who come from across the sea. For 
two generations an important phase of American life has been 
disintegrating. As parents and teachers we need to recog- 
nize that if this pillar of our culture collapses our own chil- 
dren will be the casualties. This disintegration must stop. 
George Washington knew what makes us strong; Jefferson 
knew, Lincoln knew: “This nation, under God, cannot fail!” 

Of course we must do more than merely teach correct 
principles— certainly we must practice them. I therefore close 
with the words of Francis Bacon who said : “It is not what 
you eat, but what you digest that makes you strong. It is not 
what you earn, but what you save that makes you rich. It is 
not what you preach, but what you practice that makes you a 
Christian !” 


Bibliography 


Adler, M., “what man has made 
of man,” Longmans Green, N. 
Y., 19 3 It. 

Adoratsky, V., “dialectical ma- 
terialism.” M. Lawrence, Lon- 
don, 193 It. 

Aveling, E., “the student’s 
marx,” Charles Scribner’s Sons, 
N. Y., 1902. 

Basseches, N., “STALIN,” E. P. 
Dutton Co., N. Y., 1952. 

Barbusse, H., “stalin,” John 
Lane Co., London, 1935. 

Beer, M., “the life and teach- 
ings of marx,” Parsons Co., 
London, 1921. 

Belloc, H., “the restoration of 
property,” Sheed and Ward, 
N. Y., 1936. 

Belyaev, M., “evolution,” State 
Pub. House, Moscow, 193It. 

Bentley, Elizabeth, “OUT of 
bondage,” The Devin- Adair 
Company, New York, 1951. 

Berdyaev, N., “the Russian rev- 
olution,” Sheed and Ward, 
N. Y., 1933. 

Bivort, J., “COMMUNISM AND 
anti-religion,” Burns, Oates 
& Washbourne, London, 1938. 

Blodgett, Ralph H., “comparative 
ECONOMIC SYSTEMS,” MacMil- 
lan Co., New York, 1959. 

Bober. M., “karl marx’s inter- 


pretation of history,” Har- 
vard University Press, Cam- 
bridge, 1927. 

Bohm-Bawerk, E., “karl marx 
and the close of his system,” 
T. Union Co., London, 1898. 

Boudin, L„ “the theoretical 
system OF karl marx,” Char- 
les H. Kerr Co., Chicago, 1907. 

Brameld, T., “A philosophic ap- 
proach to communism,” Uni- 
versity of Chicago Press, Chi- 
cago, 1933. 

Briefs, G., “the proletariat,” 
McGraw-Hill, N . Y ., 1938. 

Browder, E., “what is commu- 
nism?” Workers Library Publ., 
N. Y., 1936. 

Bukharin, N., “the a b c of com- 
munism,” Communist Party 
Press, London, 1922. 

Bukharin, N., “historical mate- 
rialism,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1925. 

Burnham, James, “the web of 
subversion,” John Day Co., 
N. Y., 1955. 

Burns, E., “a handbook of 
marxism,” Gollancz, London, 
1935. 

Byrnes, James F., “speaking 
frankly,” Harpers, New York, 
1957. 

Carr, E., “karl marx,” Dent & 
Sons, London, 1935. 


Bibliography 


Carr, E., “Michael bakunin,” 
Macmillan Co., London, 1937. 

Chamberlain, “the Russian rev- 
olution,” Macmillan Co., N. Y„ 

1935. 

Chamberlain, “soviet RUSSIA,” 
Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 

1935. 

Chambers, Whittaker, “witness,” 
Random House, New York, 
1952. 

Chang, S., “the Marxian theory 
OF the state,” University of 
Pennsylvania Press, Philadel- 
phia, 1931. 

Cole, G., “WIIAT MARX REALLY 

means,” Alfred A. Knopf, N. 
Y ., 193 If . 

"constitution of the U.S.S.R.,” 
International Publishers, N. Y., 

1936. 

Come, E., “dialectical mate- 
rialism,” N.C.L.C. Society, 
London, 1936. 

Cooper, R., “the logical influ- 
ence OF HEGEL ON MARX," 
Washington University Press, 
Seattle, 1925. 

Croce, B., “historical material- 
ism AND THE ECONOMICS OF 
marx,” Macmillan, N . Y., 1914 . 

Ilobb, M., “ON MARXISM TODAY,” 
Hogarth Press, London, 1932. 

Eastman, M., “marx, lenin, and 
THE SCIENCE OF REVOLUTION,” 

Allen and Unwin, London, 1926. 

Eddy, G., “the meaning of marx 
(a SYMPOSIUM),” Farrar and 
Rinehart, N. Y., 1934. 

Ellwood, C., “MARX’S ECONOMIC 
DETERMINISM IN THE LIGHT 
OF MODERN PSYCHOLOG Y,” 
American Journal of Sociology, 
Vol. XVII, 1911, pp. 35-46. 

Engels, F., “marx-engels, his- 

TORISCH-KRITISCHE GESAMTAUS- 
Gabe,” edited by D. Rjazanov. 
9 Vols. Frankfurt, 1927-1932. 


Engels, F., “marx-engels: se- 
lected CORRESPONDENCE,” M. 
Lawrence, London, 1934. 

Engels, F., “ludwig Feuerbach," 
International Publishers, N. Y. 
1934. 

Engels, F., “herr duhring’s rev- 
olution in science (anti-duh- 
RING),” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1935. 

Engels, F., “socialism: utopian 
and scientific,” International 
Publishers, N. Y., 1935. 

Engels, F., “on ‘capital’,” Inter- 
national Publishers, N. Y. 

1937. 

Engels, F., “die heilige fami- 
LIE,” Riiten, Frankfurt, 1845. 

Engels, F., “the origin of the 

FAMILY, PRIVATE PROPERTY AND 

the state,” Charles H. Kerr 
Co., Chicago, 1902. 

Foster, William Z., “toward so- 
viet AMERICA,” International 
Publishers, New York, 1932. 

Fox, R., “lenin,” Gollancz, Lon- 
don, 1933. 

Freehof, S., “marx, freud and 
EINSTEIN,” Argus Co., Chicago. 
1933. 

Goldendach, D., “karl marx: 
man AND THINKER,” Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1927. 

Goldendach, D., “karl marx and 
FRIEDRICH ENGELS,” Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1927. 

Graham, S., “STALIN,” E. Benn 
Co., London, 1931. 

Gurian, W., “bolshevism : its 
theory and practice,” Sheed 
and Ward, London, 1932. 

Gurian, W ., “the future of 
bolshevism,” Sheed and Ward, 
N. Y„ 1936. 

Gurian, W., “the rise and de- 
cline of marxism,” Bums, 
Oates & Washbourne, London, 

1938. 


Bibliography 


Halm, George N„ "economic 
systems,” Rinehart and Co., 
N. Y„ 1951. 

Hanschell, H., “ ‘history and 

class war,’ arena,” Dec., 1937. 
pp. 187-191,. 

Harper, S., “the government of 
the soviet union,” Van Nos- 
trand Co., N. Y ., 1938. 

Hawkins, D., “ ‘dialectical ma- 
terialism,’ arena,” Dec. 1937, 
pp. 167-175. 

Hearnshaw, F., “a survey of so- 
cialism,” Macmillan, London, 
1929. 

Hecker, J., "religion under the 
soviets,” Vanguard Press, N. 
Y., 1927. 

Hecker, J., “the communist 
answer to the world’s needs,” 
Chapman and Hall, London, 
1935. 

Hecker, J., “communism and re- 
ligion,” Chapman and Hall, 
London, 1933. 

Herbigny, M„ “militant athe- 
ism,” Society for the Promo- 
tion of Christian Knowledge, 
London, 1931,. 

Hill-Mudie, “the letters of 
lenin,” Chapman and Hall, 
London, 1937. 

Hook, S., “ ‘FROM HEGEL TO MARX,’ 
MODERN QUARTERLY,” Vol. VI, 
1932. 

Hook, S., “ ‘FROM HEGEL TO MARX,' 
DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM,’ 
JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY,” V ol . 

XXV, 1928. 

Hook, S., “TOWARDS AN UNDER- 
STANDING OF KARL MARX,” John 

Day Co., N. Y., 1933. 

Hyma, A., "Christianity, capi- 
talism AND COMMUNISM,” 
(publ. by author), Ann Arbor, 
1938. 

Jackson, T., “dialectics: the 
logic of MARXISM,” M. Law- 
rence Co., London, 1936. 


Jordan, George Racey, “from 
major Jordan’s diaries,” Har- 
court, Brace and Co., N. Y ., 
1952. 

Joseph, H., “THE LABOUR THEORY 
OF VALUE IN KARL MARX,” Ox- 
ford University Press, London, 
1923. 

Kautsky, K., “ethics and the 

MATERIALIST CONCEPTION OF 

history,” Charles H. Kerr, 
Chicago, 1907. 

Kautsky, K„ “the economic doc- 
trines of KARL MARX,” Black 
Co., London, 1925. 

Kologrivof, /., “god, man and 
the universe,” Coldwell Co., 
London, 1937. 

Krivitsky, W. G., “in stalin’s 
secret service,” Harper Broth- 
ers, N. Y., 1939. 

La Pira, Giorgio, “the philoso- 
phy of communism,” Fordham 
University Press, N. Y., 1952. 

Laski, H., “communism,” T. But- 
terworth Co., London, 1935. 

Laski, H., “karl marx,” League 
for Industrial Democracy, N. 
Y., 1933. 

Lenin, V., “materialism and 
empirio - criticism,” Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1927. 

Lenin, V., “the foundation of 
the communist internation- 
al,” International Publishers, 
N. Y., 1931,. 

Lenin, V., “the deception of the 
people,” M. Lawrence, London, 
1935. 

Lenin, V., “the proletarian rev- 
olution and the renegade 
kautsky,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y ., 1931,. 

Lenin, V., “the teachings of 
KARL MARX,” International 
Publishers, N. Y., 1930. 

Lenin, V ., “two tactics of social 

DEMOCRACY IN THE DEMOCRATIC 


Bibliography 


revolu ti °n,” International 
Publishers, N. Y., 1935 . 


L THE REVOLUTION OF 
1905, International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1931. 


Lenin, V., “on Britain,” M. Law- 
rence Co., London, 1934. 

Lenin, V., “the Paris commune,” 
International Publishers. N Y 

109 /. ' ' 


Lenin, V., “marx, engels, marx- 
ism” International Publishers, 
N. Y., 1935. 

Lenin, V ., “the Jewish ques- 
tion, International Publishers, 
N. Y., 19 3 U. 

Lenin, V., “a letter to American 
workers,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 19 3 It. 

Lenin, V., “the speeches of 
lenin,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1928. 

Lenin, V., “the letters of 
lenin, (edited by Hill-Mudie), 
Chapman-Hall, London, 1937. 

Lenin, V., “the state and rev- 
olution,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1932. 

Lenin, V ., “left-wing commu- 
nism,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 19 3 It. 

Lenin, V., “imperialism : the 
HIGHEST STAGE OF CAPITALISM,” 
International Publishers. N. Y 
1933. ’ 


Lenin, V., "the struggle for the 
BOLSHEVIK PARTY (1900-1904) ” 
International Publishers, N Y 
1934. 

Lenin, V., “the pre-requisites 

FOR THE FIRST RUSSIAN REVOLU- 
TION (1894-1899),’’ Internation- 
al Publishers, N. Y., 1934. 

Lenin, V., “from the bourgeois 

TO THE PROLETARIAN REVOLU- 
TION,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1934. 

Lenin, V., “the Russian revolu- 
tion, International Publishers, 
N. Y. 1938. 

Lenin, V., "after the seizure of 
POWER (1917-1920),’’ Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1934 . 

Lenin, V., “the period of ‘war 
COMMUNISM’ (1918-1920),” In- 
ternational Publishers, N. Y 
1934. 

Lenin , V ., “religion,” Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1933 . 

Levy, H., “aspects of dialectical 
materialism,” Watts and Co, 
London, 1935. 

Lindsay, A., “karl marx’s ‘capi- 
tal’,” Oxford University Press, 
London, 1925. 

Lippmann, W., ’’the good so- 
ciety,” Little, Brown & Co., 
Boston, 1937. 

Loria, A “karl marx,” T. Seltzer 
Co., N. Y., 1920. 


Lenin, V ., “toward the seizure 
of power,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1927. 


Lenin, V., “the iskra period,” 
International Publishers N Y 
1927. ' ” 


Lenin, V ., “the imperialist 
WAR, International Publishers. 
N. Y., 1927. 

Lenin, V., “the revolution of 
1917 ,” International Publishers, 
N. Y., 1927. 


Mantain, J ., “freedom in the 
MODERN WORLD,” Charles Scrib- 
ner s Sons, N. Y., 1936. 

Marx, K., “marx-engels, his- 
torisch-kritische gesamtaus- 

Gabe, edited by D. Rjazan- 
ov. 9 Vols. Frankfurt, 1927- 
1 932, 

Marx, K., “aus dem literar- 
ISCHEN NACHLASS VON KARL 
MARX, FRIEDRICH ENGELS,” 
Edited by F. Mehring. 3 Vols. 
Stuttgart, 1902. 


Bibliography 


Marx, K., “der briefwechsel 

ZWISCHEN FRIEDRICH ENGELS 
UND KARL MARX, 1811-1883,” 
edited by Bebel and Bernstein. 
1 vols. Dent & Sons, London, 
1930. 

Marx, K., “A CONTRIBUTION TO 
THE CRITIQUE OF POLITICAL 
ECONOMY,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1 90). 

Marx, K., “critique of the 
Gotha programme,” Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1933. 

Marx, K., “letters of dr. kugel- 
mann,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1931,. 

Marx, K., "selected essays,” In- 
ternational Publishers, N. Y., 
1926. 

Marx, K., “the poverty of 
philosophy,” International 
Publishers, N. Y., 1936. 

Marx, K., “marx-engels: se- 
lected correspondence,” M. 
Lawrence Co., 1931. 

Marx, K., “the civil war in 
France,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1933. 

Marx, K., “the communist mani- 
festo,” (with Engels) Interna- 
tional Publishers, N. Y., 1935. 

Marx, K., “class struggles in 
FRANCE,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1935. 

Marx, K., “the civil war in 
France,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1937. 

Marx., K., “the eighteenth 

BRUMAIRE OF LOUIS BONAPARTE,” 
International Publishers, N. Y., 
1935. 

Marx, K., “wage, labour, capi- 
tal; value, price, profit,” In- 
ternational Publishers, N. Y., 
1935. 

Marx, Karl, “capital,” Random 
House, N. Y., 1932. 

McFadden, Charles J., “the 


philosophy of communism,” 
Benziger Brothers, N. Y., 1939. 

Mehring, F., “karl marx,” John 
Lane Co., London, 1936. 

Murry, J., “the necessity of 
communism,” T. Seltzer Co., 
N. Y., 1933. 

Nicolaievsky, N., “karl marx,” J. 
B. Lippincott Co., Philadelphia, 
1936. 

Olgiati, F., “carlo marx,” Milan, 
1922. 

Osbert, R., “freud and marx: a 

DIALECTICAL STUDY,” GollancZ, 
London, 1937. 

Parce, L., “economic determi- 
nism,” Charles H., Kerr and 
Co., Chicago, 1913. 

Perchik, L., “karl marx,” Inter- 
national Publishers, N. Y., 
1931. 

Petersen, A., “karl marx and 
marxism,” Labor News Co., 
N. Y., 1933. 

Postgate, R., “karl marx,” H. 
Hamilton Co.. London. 1933. 

Prenant, M,, “biology and 
marxism,” International Pub- 
lishers, N. Y., 1939. 

“PROGRAM OF THE COMMUNIST IN- 
TERNATIONAL,” Workers Li- 
brary Publishers, N. Y., 1936. 

Rappoport, C., “la philosophie 
de L’histoire,” Riviere, Paris, 
1925. 

“REPORT OF the royal commis- 
sion,” Edmond Cloutier Co., 
Ottawa, Canada, 1916. 

Report of the Subversive Activi- 
ties Control Board Dated April 
20, 1953. 

Ruhle, Otto, “karl marx,” Viking 
Press, New Home Library Edi- 
tion, N. Y., 1913. 

Russel, B., “bolshevism: prac- 
tice and theory,” Bruce and 
Howe, N. Y., 1920. 


Bibliography 


Russel, p., “THE MEANING OF 
marx,” (a symposium) Farrar 
and Rinehard, N. Y., 1931 . 

Salter, F ., “karl marx and mod- 
ern socialism,” Macmillan Co., 
London, 1921. 

Schmidt, W., “the origin and 
the growth of religion,” 
Methuen Co., London, 1931. 

Seligman, E., “the economic in- 
terpretation of HISTORY,” Co- 
lumbia University Press N Y 
1925. ’ ' ” 

Seton-Watson, Hugh, “from 
LENIN TO MALENKOV,” Frede- 
rick A. Praeger, N. Y., 1953 . 

Sheed, F., “communism and 
man,” Sheed and Ward, Lon- 
don, 1938. 

Shirokov-Moseley, “a textbook 
of marxism,” Gollancz, London 
1937. 

Spargo, J., “karl marx,” B. 
Huebsch Co., N. Y., 1910. 

Stalin, J., “the foundation of 
leninism,” International Pub- 
lishers, 193 If. 

Stalin, J., “the problems of 
leninism,” International Pub- 
lishers 19 3 U. 

Stalin, J., “THE OCTOBER REVOLU- 
TION,” International Publish- 
ers., N. Y., 193 If. 

Stalin, J., “leninism,” (2 vols.), 
Allen and Unwin, London, 1933 . 


Stalin, J., “marxism and the na- 
tional AND COLONIAL QUES- 
TION,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1935. 

Stalin, J ., “from the first to 
the second five-year plan,” 
International Publishers. N Y 
1935. 

Stalin, J., “on the new consti- 
tution,” International Publish- 
ers, N. Y., 1935. 

Stuart, J ohn Leighton, “fifty 
years in china,” Random 
house, N. Y., 1955. 

Trotsky, L., “THE HISTORY OF THE 
RUSSIAN revolution,” Simon 
and Schuster, N. Y., 1936. 

Wade, W., “u. N. today,” H. W. 
Wilson Company, New York 
1955. 

White, W., “lenin,” Smith and 
Haas, N. Y., 1936. 

Wilson, Edmund, “to the Fin- 
land station,” Doubleday and 
Co., N. Y., 1953. 

Wood, H., “CHRISTIANITY AND 
communism,” Round Table 
Press, N. Y., 1933 . 

Yaroslavsky, E., “RELIGION in 
the u.s.s.R.,” International 
Publishers, N. Y., 1935 . 

Zetkin, C., “REMINISCENCES OF 
lenin,” International Publish- 
ers, N. K., 1935. 


Index 


Abt, John J. 

Contact of W. Chambers, 144 
A-bomb 

Materials for A-Bomb sent to 
Russia, 166-167 
Stalin’s attitude toward, 167 
Tito comments on 175-176 
Secrets stolen, 199-200 
Effect on Korean War, 200 
Red scheme to ban tests, 259- 
260 

Acheson, Dean 

As U.S. Sec. of State, 190 
Policy announced on Formosa 
and Korea, 190-191 

Activist Theory 

Communist explanation of, 45 

Adams, Eric 

Listed by Gouzenko, 301 

Adler, Solomon 

Contact of E. Bentley, 150 

.1 frica 

Timetable of Conquest, 232 
Reds plan chaos for, 232 
Tragedy of Congo, 232-236 
Effect of race war, 233-234 
Communist influence, 234 
On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
257 

.4 fro-Asian Conference 

Small nations taunt Reds, 207 
Communist colonialism, 207 


Aggression of Reds 

Excused as merely a “defense 
measure”, 80 

Alexander II, Tsar 
Reform program, 91 
Assassination, 91 

Alexander III, Tsar 

Policies under Nicholas II, 99 

A narchists 

Influence on Marx, 61-62 

Arabic Countries 

On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
256-257 

Art 

Red goal to degrade, 260-261 
A sia 

Red plans to take Asia, 131 
A theism 

Communist promotion of, 51 
Union of Militant Atheists, 123 
Nietzsche advocated, 347 
Makes men insecure, 352 
Fruits of, 352 

Austria 

Seized by Hitler, 158 

A utuinobiles 

76V* of, in USA, 325 

Rakunin, Mikhail 

Russian Revolutionary, 24 


Index 


Attacked by Marx, 24 
Expelled from Int’i., 24 
Description of Marx, 28-29 
Int. Marxism to Russia, 92 
Comment on Marx, 92 
Death of, in 1876, 92 


Bang-J ensen, Povl 
Danish diplomat, 218 
Criticizes UN staff, 218 
Defies Hammarskjold, 218-219 
Called mentally ill, 218-219 
Fired, 219 

Fears being murdered, 219 
Body found, 219 
Called “suicide,” 219 

Bauer, Bruno 
Associate of Marx, 12 
Anti-Christian, 12 
Journal of Atheism fails, 12 
Discharged from Univ., 13 

Belgium 

Attempt to prepare Congo for 
independence, 232-236 
Wealth in Congo, 233 
Threatened by Lumumba, 233 
Grants Congo independence, 

Zoo 

Ra 233-234 r aga ' nSt Bel S ians . 
Effort to help Congolese, 234- 
236 

UN hostility toward, 235-236 


Bentley, Elizabeth 
Conversion to Com., 147 
Columbia University unit, 147 
Works for Soviets, 147 
“Wife” of Jacob Golos, 148 
Replaces W. Chambers, 147-148 
Advice to associates, 149 
Washington contacts, 150-152 
Gets “Order of Red Star,” 153 
Disillusionment, 153-154 
Reports to FBI, 154 

Benson, Ezra Taft 

U. S. Sec. of Agriculture, 340 
Writes book on farmers, 340 

Benson, Dr. George S. 

On Capitalism, 336-338 
Beria, Lavrenti P. 

Heads Russian Secret Police 

1 1 O/? * 


Heads slave labor camps, 196 
Heads atomic plants, 196 
Coalition with Malenkov, 196 
Favors coexistence, 196 
Seeks power, 213 
Overthrown, 205, 213 
Executed, 213 

Berlin 

Red Crisis over, 223 
Bible 

Communist theory of, 12 
Fallacy of theory, 70-71 
Communist view of, 306 
Provides own rebuttal, 364 
Not studied enough, 372 
Fact or fiction, 372 
Judaic Code from, 368-375 
Christian Code from, 376 

Bogota Riots 
Soviet inspired, 240 
Sparked by murder of Gaitan 
240 

Looting and burning of city 
240-241 

1,000 killed, 241 

Castro called leader in, 240-241 

Bolsheviks 

Meaning of name, 96 
Followers of Lenin, 96 
After Rev. of 1905, 102 
Lenin rejuvenates, 103 
Bolshevik Party org. 106 
Name changed to C.P., 118 
Spread violence, 137-138 

Bourgeois 

Communist meaning of, 45-46 
Boyer, Dr. Raymond 
Listed by Gouzenko, 359 
Bradford, Governor William 
Comments on Communism, 133 
Opposes Communism, 134, 343 
Britain 
See England 
Bronstein, Lev 

True name of Leon Trotsky, 97 
Browder, Earl 

With Eliz. Bentley, 157 
Denounced by Duclos, 174 
Expelled from CPA, 174-175 


Index 


Budenz, Louis 

Edited “Daily Worker,” 190 
Names Owen Lattimore, 190 
Names L. Rosinger, 190 

Bukharin, Nikolai 
Enemy of Stalin, 142 
Less violent program, 142 
Purge by Stalin, 142 

Bulganin, Nikolai 

Rise to power, 205-206 
Overthrows Malenkov, 205 
Overthrows Beria, 205 
Becomes premier, 213 
Demoted, 214 

Bullitt, William C. 

Ambassador to Russia, 125 
Difficulty with Reds, 125 
Warns Pres. Roosevelt, 170 

Bunche, Dr. Ralph 

U. N. Undersecretary, 219 
Attacks Bang-Jensen, 219 
Sent to Congo, 235 
Backs Communist regime of 
Lumumba, 235 

Burgess, Guy 

Sec. of Br. Embassy, 195 
Flees to Russia, 195 
British fugitive, 195 

Burster, Norman 

Contact of E. Bentley, 150 

Business Men 

Ways to combat Communism, 
282-283 

Byrnes, James F. 

Note on Hopkins, 178-179 
Attitude of Stalin, 179 

Canada 

On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
257-258 

“Capital” 

Written by Marx, 25-26 
Fails to catch on, 26 
Engels completes, 26 


Capitalism 

To be abolished, 17 
Theory on profits, 53 
Overthrow inescapable, 54-55 
Problem of unemployment, 54 
To be suppressed, 56-57 
Antagonism between classes, 75 
Labor under capitalism, 75-76 
“Economic necessity,” 85 
Introduced by Pilgrims, 132 
What capitalism is, 327-342 
Natural system, 327 
Fits physical needs, 328 
Fits spiritual needs, 329 
Efficiency of, 328 
Both buyer and seller gain, 331 
Freedom to try, 333 
Freedom to sell, 334 
Freedom to buy, 335 
Freedom to fail, 335 
Capitalist defined, 280, 337-338 
Advantages summarized, 342 

Captive Nations Proclamation 
Satellites should be free, 265 

Castillo, Hipolito 

Member of Soviet apparatus, 
247 

Assigned to subvert Latin 
America, 247 

Captain of Castro invasion 
yacht, 247 

Castro, Angel 

Father of Fidel, 238 
Wealthy plantation owner, 238 
Five illegitimate children, 238 

Castro, Fidel 

Illegitimate birth, 238 
Rebellious youth, 238 
Attempt to kill teacher, 238 
At University of Havana, 238 
Attempts first political murder, 
239 

Commits two political murders, 
239 

Commits third murder, 241-242 
Soviet agent in Bogota riots, 
240-241 

“26 of July Movement”, 246-247 
Sentenced to 15 years, 247 


387 


Index 


Flees to Mexico, 247 
Invasion of Cuba, 247-248 
Soviet support, 248 
U. S. support, 248 
Conquest of Cuba, 249-250 
Communizes Cuba, 250 
Embraced by Khrushchev, 251 

Castro, Raul 

Brother of Fidel Castro, 247 
Sentenced to 13 years, 247 
Flees to Mexico, 247 
Communist training, 247 
Commander of rebel army, 247 
Kidnaps U. S. Sericemen, 246 

Cattle 

Effect of price supports, 340 

Chambers, Whittaker 
Early life, 141 

Becomes a Communist, 141-142 
Resents Stalin, 143 
Becomes inactive, 143 
Communist writer, 142-143 
Senior editor of Time, 142 
As Soviet courier, 143-144 
List of U.S. contacts, 144-145 
Changes philosophy, 145-146 
Abandons Communism, 146 
Writes Witness, 146 
Note on Stalin purges, 128 

Cheka, Secret Police 

Organized by Lenin, 118-119 

Purpose, 119 

Chief assassinated, 119 

Act of revenge, 119 

War on White Russians, 119 

Chian// Kai-shek 

Dictator of China, 181 
Promises democracy, 181 
Gesture to Red Chinese, 181 
Denounces Yalta Pact, 182 
Proposes constitution, 183 
Frustrated by Reds, 183-186 
Peace impossible, 184 
Invades Manchuria, 184-185 
Stopped by Gen. Marshall, 184 
Accused of aggression, 184 
Admits he is beaten, 187 
Retreats to Formosa, 187 
Threatened by Reds, 206 
U.S. protection of, 207 


Child Labor 

Used in Russia, 221 


China (See also Red China) 
Helps plan UN, 171 
Chiang promises democracy, 183 
Invitation to Reds, 181 
Effect of Yalta Pact, 182 
Recog. by Russia, 182 
Demands of Red Chinese, 182 
Russian looting, 183 
Russians evacuate, 183 
Replaced by Red Chinese, 183 
Civil War, 183-186 
Collapse of Nationlists, 187 
White Paper on China, 187-189 
Wedemever Report on China 
186-187 

Effect of U.S. Policy, 187-188 


Chinese Communists 
Led by Mao Tse-tung, 181 
Distrusted by Chiang, 181 
Occupy Manchuria, 183 
Trigger Civil War, 182-184 
Amazing demands of, 184 
Violate truce, 185 
Victory over Nationalists, 187 
Set up “People’s Republic,” 187 
See also “Red China” 


Choice 

See “Free Will” 


Christian Code 
Outlined, 375-377 


Christianity 

Marx’s antagonism, 12-13 
Attack on, 12 

Engels’ antagonism toward, 15 
Communist antagonism toward 
Christianity, 50-52 
"We hate Christians,” 71 
Obstacle to revolution, 71 
Communism anti-Christian 
134, 346 

Christian code, 319-377 
Trend in education, 377 

Christmas 

Celebration forbidden, 123 
Selling, trees a crime, 123 

Churchill, Winston 
Warns U.S. President, 171-172 


Index 


Civil Liberties 

Red view of, 254, 311-312 
Red excuse for unlawful acts, 
260 

Clark, General Mark 

Testifies on Korean War, 195 

Clarke, Dr. Adam 

No Ancient Christian Com- 
munism, 288, 345-346 

Class Struggle 

As key to progress, 47 
Dialectics in society, 47 
Private property causes, 48 
Fallacy of theory of, 74-75 
Inadequate explanation, 78 
Not part of Russian coup, 78 

Classes 

To be abolished, 17 
U.S. attitude toward, 319 

Collins, Henry H. 

Contact of W. Chambers, 144 

Coal 

U.S. produces 30% of all, 325 
Coe, Frank 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 150 
Coexistence 

Between U.S. and Russia, 125 
Second stage, 126 
Thud stage, 162 
Fourth stage, 169 
Repudiated by U.S., 196-197 
Urged by Red leaders, 206-207 
True Marxist attitude, 289-290 
Proposal in Timetable, 254 
Fallacies of 264-265 
Woodrow Wilson on, 274-275 
Current Red goal, 259 

Communism 

Marx’s influence on, 26-27 
Promises peace and riches, 32 
Law of Opposites, 33-34, 39 
Law of Negation, 34-35, 39 
Law of Transformation, 35, 41 
Anti-religious aspect, 12, 16, 

51, 68-71 

Abolishes private prop., 17, 57, 
77, 79, 80 


Abolishes classes, 17 
Abclishes capitalism, 17, 55-57 
Contradicts history, 42 
Economic Determinism, 44, 63 
Origin of the State, 48, 67, 84 
Origin of religion, 50, 70 
Origin of morals, 51, 71 
Theory of wages, 53, 77 
Theory on value, 53 
Surplus value defined, 54 
Theory on profits, 53-54 
Nature of management, 53 
Revolution inescapable, 54-55 
Dictatorship of the Prol., 56-57 
Final phase of Communism, 57 
Classless, stateless, 58-60 
Compulsory labor, 82-83 
Theory fails in Russia, 78 
Dictatorship permanent, 84 
Inefficiency of, 85-86 
Negative approach, 86-88 
Increases Bureaucracy, 86 
Communizing Russia, 117-121 
Second attempt, 122-124 
Stalin and Capitalism, 129 
American Pilgrims try Com- 
munism, 131-132 
Marxism comes to U.S., 135-140 
Behind U.S.A., 264 
Interpretation of history, 44-63 
Not Christian practice, 346 
Quotes from defenders, 289-316 
Views on Coexistence 232, 289- 
290 

Views on illegality, 236, 293-294 
Revolutionary violence, 291-293 
Communists without labels, 353 
First major premise, 354 
Second major premise, 355 
Third major premise, 355 
Fourth major premise, 356 
Secret weapon of, 360-361 
Economic weakness, 220 
More progress under Tsar, 220 
Squanders man power, 220 
Timetable of Conquest, 253-258 
Current Communist goals 259- 
262 

Should be outlawed, 269-271 

Communist International 
For World Revolution, 125 
Soviet attitude toward, 125 
To overthrow U.S., 125-126 
“Dissolution” in 1943, 169 


Index 


Called a “farce,” 170 
Attitude of Red leaders toward 
299-303 


Communist League 
Leadership of Marx in, 17 
Collapse of, 19-20 


Communist Manifesto 

Written by Marx and Engels, 16 
Advocated revolution, 17 
Overthrow of Capitalism, 17-18 
Abolish private property, 17 
Abolish family, 17 
Classless, stateless society 
promised, 17-18 


Communist Party of America 
Organized by Russian, 135 
Sends delegates to Russia, 136 
Enters Com. International, 136 
Declared agency of Russia, 136 
U®ed by Soviet spies, 146-147 
Withdraws membership in 
Comintern, 174 
Comm. Political Assn., 174 
Return to Marxism, 174 
Earl Browder expelled, 174-175 
Wm. Z. Foster as leader, 175 
CPA Leaders arrested by FBI 
197-198 


Congo 

Natives cannibalistic, 233 
Prepared for independence in 
1964, 233 

Demands of Lumumba, 233 
Civil war threatened, 233 
Premature independence in 
1960, 233 

Lumumba launches race riots, 
233-234 

Flight of Belgians, 234 
Genocide in Congo, 234 
Lumumba arrested, 235 
UN intervention, 234-235 
Communist influence in, 234- 

235 

Lumumba killed, 236 
Congolese resist UN, 236 
UN attempt to make Congo a 
colony, 235-236 
Congolese seek Belgian help, 

236 

Connally Reservation 
Reds seek repeal, 262 


Consciousness 
Communist explanation, 36 
Not part of free will, 65-66 

Cordier, Andrew Wellington 
Associate of Hiss, 218 
No 2 man in UN, 218 
Attacks Bang-Jensen, 218 

Cotton 

Effect of price supports, 341 
Courts 

Unnecessary under Marxism, 57 
Creative Processes 
Communist explanation, 33-38 
Cuba 

Lack of political stability, 243 
Batista coup in 1933, 243 
New constitution in 1940, 243 
Batista as President, 243 
Batista coup in 1953, 243 
Improved economy, 233-234 
Improved standard of living:. 

244 B 

Improved literacy, 244 
Improved wages, 244 
Castro invasion, 247 
Castro conquest, 249 
Castro prevents elections, 245 
Communist policies in, 250 
Soviets boast of conquest. 249- 
250 

Weakness of U. S. Policy to- 
ward, 248-249 

Communist takeover similar to 
loss of China, 251 

Czechoslovakia 
Demanded by Hitler, 158 
Soviet satellite, 180-181 
Uprising against Reds, 202 

Czologosz, Leon 
Assassin of Pres. McKinley, 138 
Dayal, Rajeshwar 
UN Chief in Congo, 235 
Favors Communist forces, 235 
Congolese seek removal of, 235 
Deane, General John R. 

Warning on Lend-Lease, 164 
Overruled by Hopkins, 164 
Warning on Red strategy, 171 


Index 


Declaration of Independence 
Significance of, 317-318 

Democracy 

Attempt in Russia, 111-112 
Reds destroy, 115-116 
Setting up in U.S., 262, 317-320 

Dialectical Materialism 
Law of Opposites, 33-35, 39 
Law of Negation, 34-35, 39 
Law of Transformation, 35, 41 
Meaning of dialectics, 34 
Evolutionary philosophy, 36 
Critique of, 38-42 
Foundation of Marxism, 354 
Effect upon scientists, 360 

Dictatorship of the Proletariat 
To come by violence, 56 
Purpose of, 57 

Prepares for full Comm., 57-58 
Appears permanent, 84-85 

Diplomatic intrigue 

Communist view of, 303 

Disarmament 

Current Red goal, 259 
Fallacies of, 263-264 

Dubois, Jules 

Defends Castro, 248 
Castigates Batista, 248 

Duclos, Jacques 

French strategist, 174 
Denounces Earl Browder, 174 
Demands change by CPA, 174 

Dulles, John Foster 

Explains UN failure, 173 
View on Indo-China, 204 
Organizes regional pacts, 204 
Drive to isolate Reds, 204 
Answers Soviet complaint, 205 
Resists Khrushchev visit, 223 
Policy vindicated, 224 
Why UN failed, 266 

Duma 

Russian People’s Assembly, 101 
Demand for popular represen- 
tation in, 101 

Dissolved by Tsar in 1917, 111 


East Germany 

Becomes Soviet satellite, 180 
Uprising against Reds, 202 

Economics 

Economic Determinism dis- 
cussed, 44-47, 63-64 
Influence on society, 46-47 
Economics and religion, 50-51 
Economics and morals, 51-52 
Economics and the state, 49 
Influence on Marx, 61-62 
Fallacy of Red Slogan, 82-83 
Economic necessity, 85 
Failure of Communist econom- 
ics, 117-118 

Early problems in U.S., 130-132 
Education 

Communist view of, 314-315 
Christian teaching in, 377 
Infiltration of, 260 
How teachers can fight 
Communism, 277-280 
How students can fight 
Communism, 280-281 

Education, Soviet 

Cut back by Khrushchev, 221 
Few go to college, 221 

Eisenhower, Dwight D. 

Election, 195 

Invitation to Khrushchev, 223- 
224 

Russian visit canceled, 227 
Elections 

In Russian Const., 172 
Gouzenko’s comment on, 358 

Electric Power 

42% of, produced in U. S., 325 

Engels, Friedrich 
Early life, 15 
Becomes writer, 15 
Convert to Communism, 15 
Meets Marx, 15 
Finances Marx, 16 
Helps write Manifesto, 17 
Promotes rev. in France, 16 
Publishes two volumes of 
Marx’s “Capital,” 25-26 
Gives Marx’s funeral oration 
at graveside, 27 


Index 


England. 

Marx exiled to, 19 
Opposes Lenin in 1917, 114 
Hears Hitler’s demands, 159 
Enters World War II, 159 
Helps plan UN, 171 
Slow post-war recovery, 335 
Red appeal to, 254-255 
Use of trade as Red bait, 255 

Europe 

Conquest of, predicted, 122 

Timetable of Conquest, 

Evolution 

Communist theory of, 35-37 
Fallacy of Marx’s theory, 41-42 

Family 

Marx wanted to abolish, 17 
Place of women, 72-73 
Stalin wanted to abolish, 123 
Judaic-Christian family, 372- 
373 

Moral integrity in the, 374 
Red attack on, 262 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 
Built by J. Edgar Hoover, 198 
Ked efforts to discredit, 198 
Arrests Red leaders, 199 
Klaus Fuchs’ case, 199 
Rosenberg spy case, 200 
Greenglass spy case, 200 
Battle of the Underground, 200 
Communists attack, 262 

F ederation of the Just 

Early Red organization, 17 
Feudalism 

Similar to Red economics, 79 
System of near slavery, 317 

Feuerbach, Ludwig 

Writes on Christianity, 12 

First International 
Founding of, 22 
Collapse of movement, 24 

Five-Year Plan 

Used to Communize Russia, 122 
Failure of plan, 123-124 
Uprising against Stalin, 124 


Fitzgerald, Edward J. 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 
Formosa 

Chiang flees to Formosa, 187 
American diplomats abandon 
190-191 

Khrushchev orders seizure, 205 
Chinese assault on, 205-206 
U.S. defense of, 207 

Foster, William Z. 

Drive on U.S. labor, 138 
Author of “Toward Soviet 
America,” 139 

Favors revolution in U.S. 139 
Chooses Red flag over U.S., 139 
Chosen to head CPA, 142 
Succeeds Earl Browder as head 
of CPA, 174-175 
U.S. conquest by Red Army, 175 

France 

Revolution of, in 1848, 17 
Capitulates to Hitler, 159 
Slow post-war recovery, 335 
0n B ed Timetable of Conquest, 
Zo5 

Freedom 

Communist definition, 46 
Reds postpone, 60 
Freedom in economics, 332 
Means chance to choose, 332 
Only moves one way, 332 
Freedom to try, 333 
Freedom to sell, 334 
Freedom to buy, 335 
Freedom to fail, 335 

Free Enterprise Capitalism 
Used by Pilgrims, 132 
A natural system, 327 
Provides physical needs, 328 
Provides spiritual needs, 329 
Efficiency of, 328 
Freedom to try, 333 
Freedom to sell, 334 
Freedom to buy, 335 
Freedom to fail, 335 
“Capitalist” defined, 337 
Advantages summarized, 342 

Free Trade 

Current Communist goal, 259 


Index 


Free Will 

Communist denial of, 45-46 
Fallacy of theory, 65-66 

Fuchs, Klaus 

Physicist at Los Alamos, 199 
Suspected of espionage, 199 
Heads Br. atom plant, 199 
Arrest and confession, 199 

Gangsters 

Used by Communists, 142 

Gapon, Father George 

Leads Russian workers, 100 

Gardner, Arthur 

U.S. Ambassador to Cuba, 245 
Resists Castro, 245 
Fired by State Department, 245 
Points out Cuban blunder, 251- 
252 

Germany 

Revolution in, 18-19 
In World War II, 106-107 
View of Russian Rev., 110 
Encourages Lenin, 112-113 
Demands to Lenin, 116 
Treaty with Lenin, 117 
Hitler’s rise to power, 124 
W. Germany prospers, 335 
Reds oppose unification, 259 

Gerson, Harold 

Listed by Gouzenko, 359 

Glasser, Harold 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

God 

Source of Morals? 51 
Source of religion? 362 
Two commandments, 368 
Who has seen God? 369 
Plan for happiness, 372 

Gold, Harry 

Engages in espionage, 199-200 
Courier for Fuchs, 199 
Gets atomic secrets, 200 
With Rosenbergs, 200 
With Greenglass, 200 

Gold, Sonia 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 


Gold, William alias Bela Gold 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 150 

Goldman, Emma 

Speech incites murder, 138 
Deported to Russia, 138 
Renounces Communism, 138 

Goldwater, Sen. Barry 

Advocates isolation of USSR, 
270 

Golos, Jacob 

Member of Soviet NKVD, 148 
Lives with E. Bentley, 148 
Suspect, Trotsky murder, 148 
Disillusioned, 153 
Death, 153 

Gouzenko, Igor 

Russian code clerk, 170 
View on Commintern, 169-170 
Cites Soviet attitudes, 175 
Arrival in Canada, 357 
Views on freedom, 357 
Views on elections, 358 
Leaves Soviet embassy, 358 
Report of Royal Comm., 359 
Spies listed by, 359 

Greece 

Historical significance, 68 
Problem of class struggle, 74 

Greenburg, Michael 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Greenglass, David 

Relative of Rosenberg, 200 
Worked at Los Alamos, 200 
Commits espionage, 200 
Sentenced 15 years, 201 

Gregg, Joseph 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Gross, Ernest A. 

UN official, 218 
Attacks Bang-Jensen, 218 
Wants Red China recognized, 
218 

Guevara, Dr. Ernesto “Che" 
Argentinian Communist, 247 
Member of Soviet apparatus, 
247 


Index 


Assigned to Cuban Revolution, 
247 

Seizure of power in Cuba, 248 

Hammarskjold, Dag 
UN Secretary General, 218-219 
Fires Bang-Jensen, 219 
Backs Lumumba, 235 
Seeks Communist coalition for 
Congo, 226 

Resisted by Congolese, 236 
Accused of imperialism, 236 
Competes with Khrushchev for 
Congo, 235-236 

Halperin, Israel 

Listed by Gouzenko, 359 

Halperin, Maurice 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Hate 

Communist concept, 71 
Needed for conquest, 71 
Hatred of Christianity, 71 
Mission of Marx, 349 

Hegel, Georg Wilhelm 
German philosopher, 12 
Influence on Marx, 61-62 

Hiss Alger 

Friend of W. Chambers, 146 
Helps set up UN, 144 
Present at Yalta, 144 
Chambers describes, 145 
Convicted of perjury, 145 
Name on Red folder, 167 

History 

Communist view, 44-47 
Fallacy of theory, 63-65 

Hitler, Adolf 

Rise to power, 124 
Threat saves Stalin, 124 
Leader of Nazi Party, 157 
Bavarian coup fails, 157 
Writes “Mein Kampf,” 157 
Proposes Nordic empire, 157 
Materialistic philosophy, 157 
Signs pact with Stalin, 159 
Attack on Poland, 159 
Attack on Russia, 160 
Believed Russia beaten, 160 
Inspired by Nietzsche, 348 
Brutality of, 348 


Homosexuality 

Exploited by Communists, 261 

Hoover, John Edgar 

Legal brief on Reds, 198 
Concern over appeasement, 198 
Evades Red trap, 198 
Builds strong FBI, 198 
Stresses U.S. security, 201 

Hoover, Herbert 

Heads relief mission, 120 

Hopkins, Harry 

At Russian Aid Rally, 163 
Heads Lend-Lease program, 164 
Overrules military, 164 
Letter on A-bomb, 166-167 
Secret deal on uranium, 167 
Advises trust Stalin, 170 
Suspects Red plot, 178 
Visits Stalin, 178 
Stalin’s rebuff, 179 
Pleads with Stalin, 179 
Death of, 179 

House Committee on Un- 
American Activities 

Red' plan to eliminate, 261-262 
Hungarian Revolution 
Initial mass meeting, 215 
Started by secret police, 215 
Hungarians beat Soviets, 215- 
216 

Betrayal of negotiators, 216 
Soviet invades Hungary, 216 
Motion to censure USSR, 217 
Russia vetoes censure, 217 
UN investigation of, 217-220 
UN weakness during, 217 

Hungary 

Becomes Red Satellite, 180 
Idolatry 

Origin of religion? 362-364 
Competitive religion, 364 

Illegal operations 

Under Communism, 293 
Inchon 

Invaded by UN troops, 193 
India 

On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
256-257 


Index 


Indo-China 

Desire for independence, 203 
Red infiltration, 203 
Red forces in France, 203 
Armistice in 1954, 203 
Views of Sec. Dulles, 204 

Industrial Revolution 
Effect on production, 53 
Effect on Marx, 62 
Effect on Engels, 62-63 

Inertia 

Deterrent to progress, 83 
Incentives to overcome, 83 

International 
Workingmen’s Assn. 

Organized by Marx, 22-23 
Called First International, 23 
Collapse of movement, 24-25 

IWW (Int’l. Workers of the 
World ) 

Consolidates with CPA, 134 
Teaches acts of violence to 
CPA, 135-136 

Japan 

War with Russia, 99 
Pact with Stalin, 160 
Pearl Harbor attack, 161 
On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
255 

Riots in Japan, 255 
U.S. aid to, 255 

Jefferson, Thomas 

Liberal reforms of, 322 
Treatment for aggressor 
nations, 270 

Jessup, Philip 

State Dept, official, 189 

Jordan, Major George Racey 
Lend-Lease expediter, 165 
Discovers contraband, 166 
Uranium to Russia, 167 
Top-secret files, 166-167 

Joseph, Julius J. 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Joy, Admiral Charles 
View of Korean War, 195 


Judaic-Christian Code 
Communist view of, 52 
Fallacy of Red theory, 70 
As “class morality,” 71 
Frighten a Communist? 368 
Judaic Code, 368-375 
Christian Code, 375 

Kadar, Janos 
Heads Hungarian puppet 
government, 218 
Apologists in UN for, 218 

Kasavubu, Joseph 

President of the Congo, 234-235 
Ousts Lumumba, 235 
Resists Communist coalition, 
236 

Attends Congolese Summit 
Conference, 236 

Kaufman, Judge Irving Robert 
Presides at Rosenberg trial, 
200-201 

Sentences Rosenbergs to death. 
200-201 

Kennan, George F. 

View of U.S. diplomacy, 162 
Khokhlov, Nikolai 
Defected Soviet official, 205 
Warns West of Khrushchev 
ambitions, 205 

Khrushchev, Nikita 
Rise to power 205-206 
Overthrows Malenkov, 205 
Orders Formosa attack, 205 
Birth, 210 

Raised an illiterate, 210 
First formal education, 210 
Wins Stalin’s favor, 210 
Dictator of Ukraine, 210-212 
Creates famine, 210 
Hangman of the Ukraine, 212 
Directs State farms, 212 
Seizes power, 212-214 
Betrays Hungarians, 216 
Criticizes Soviet farmers, 221- 
222 

Political problems of, 222-223 
Seeks trip to U.S., 223-224 
Visit a mistake? 224-225 
Informed on U.S., 224 
Fears competitors, 223 


Index 


Cancels Eisenhower visit, 227 
Cancels Summit Conference, 
227 

Embraces Fidel Castro, 261 
Advocates “self-determination,” 
274 

Kiraly, General Bela 
Describes Hungarian 
Revolution, 216 

Kirov, Sergei 

Stalin’s successor, 127 
Murdered, 127 
Effect on Stalin, 127 

Knowland, Sen. William 
Presents Red Timetable, 264 

Kramer, Charles 

Contact of Chambers, 144 
Contact of E. Bentley, 161 

Krivitsky, General W . G. 

Secret agent for Stalin, 157 
Writes book, 168 
Explains Stalin’s pact, 169 

Krupskaya, Nadezhda 
Wife of Lenin, 95 

Kulaks 

Prosperous peasants, 121 
Stalin liquidates, 121-122 

Labor 

Red views on, 815 
Labor Unions 

To stabilize leadership, 322 
Red infiltration of, 136, 262 

Lattimore, Owen 

Influence on policy, 190 
View on Formosa, 190 
View on Red China, 190 
View on S. Korea, 191-192 

Law 

Not related to production, 69 

Law of Negation 

Explains increase, 34-36 
Fallacies of, 39-40 


Law of Opposites 

To explain motion, 33-34 
Fallacies of, 39 

Law of Supply and Demand 
Helps Russian NEP, 118 
Sets price, 336-339 
Upset by controls, 339 

Law of Transformation 

Explains origin of life, 35-37 
Fallacy of, 41 

Law of Variation 

Capitalism satisfies, 328 

Lawyers 

Plan to eliminate, 67 

Lee, Duncan Chaplin 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Legislators 

Ways to combat Communism, 
283-284 

Lend-Lease 

American generosity to Russia, 
162-163 

View of Congress, 163 
Dominated by diplomats, 164 
Top priorities to Reds, 164 
Reds get uranium, 167 
Tied up with espionage, 165 
Saved Russia, 165 
Soviet view of, 165-166 
Stalin angry over, 178-179 
Hopkins’ responsibility, 179 

Lenin, Nikolai (V. I.) 

Aristocratic ancestry, 93 
Early youth, 93 
Brother hanged, 93 
Studies Marxism, 94 
Brilliant law student, 94 
View during famine, 94 
Joins “Fighting Union,” 94 
Stomach tuberculosis, 94 
Meets Plekhanov, 94 
Organizes Communist Party, 96 
Sentenced to Siberia, 95 
Marxist marriage, 95 
“Capitalism in Russia,” 96 
German headquarters, 95 
Edits “The Spark," 95 
British headquarters, 96 


Index 


Followers, Bolsheviks, 96 
Trotsky opposes, 101 
Meets Stalin, 103 
Exiled to Switzerland, 112 
Sponsored by Germans, 112 
Counter-revolution, 114 
Loses in free election, 115 
Adjourns Duma, 115 
Takes Russia out of war, 116 
Bows to German demands, 117 
First Communist dictator, 117 
Engulfed in civil war, 118 
Joined by Trotsky, 118 
Executes Tsar and family, 119 
Wounded, 119 
Admits defeat, 120 
Introduces NEP, 120 
Suffers stroke, 121 
Tries to block Stalin, 121 
Death of, 121 

Leshinsky, Solomon 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

Lewis, W. Arthur 
British Socialist, 202 
Socialism disappointing, 202 

Liberals 

Origin of, 318 
Modern distortion, 318 
U.S. Founding Fathers, 318 
Results in U.S., 323 

Life 

Communist explanation of, 36 

Life Insurance 

U.S. coverage high, 323 

Litvinov, Maxim 

Associate of Stalin, 105 
Arrested in France, 105 
Gets U.S. recognition, 125 
Makes promises to U.S., 125 
Repudiates promises, 125-126 

Locke, John 

Influence on U.S., 321 

Lodge, Henry Cabot 
Why UN failed, 266 

Lovestone, Jay 

Heads CPA in 1928, 142 
Purged by Stalin, 142 
Replaced by Foster, 142 


Loyalty Oaths 

Red opposition to, 260 

Lumumba, Patrice 

First Premier of Congo, 233 
Communist agent 233-234 
Launches race war, 233-234 
Demands UN help, 234 
Betrays Congo to Reds, 234 
Demoted by Kasavubu, 234 
Arrested by Mobutu, 234-235 
Backed by Hammarskiold, 235- 
236 

Escapes, 236 

Reward for capture, 236 

Killed by natives, 236 

Lunin, David Gordon 
Listed by Gouzenko, 359 

Lvovna, Alexandra 

Wife of Leon Trotsky, 98 

Lyons, Eugene 

Testimony on Khrushchev visit, 
224 

MacArthur, Gen. Douglas 
UN commander, 192-193 
Invasion of Inchon, 193 
Attack by Red Chinese, 193 
Ignores gag order, 194 
Relieved of Command, 194 
Returns to U.S., 194 

Machines 

Marx misinterprets, 62-63, 77 
Under Capitalism, 330 

MacLean, Donald 
British diplomat, 195 
Flees to Iron Curtain, 195 
British fugitive, 195 

Madison, James 

Influence on U.S. Const., 320 

Magdoff, Harry 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

Malenkov, Georgi 

Replaces Stalin, 195-196 
Economic problems, 196 
Coalition with Beria, 195-196 
Advocates coexistence, 196 
Seeks power, 213 


Index 


Overthrown, 205, 213-214 
Deserts Beria, 205, 213 
Demoted, 213-214 

Man 

A graduate animal, 3, 37 
Highest intelligence, 37 
Physical needs of, 328 
Spiritual needs of, 329 
Capitalism satisfies needs, 840 
Idea of a superman, 347-348 
Men worship men, 350-351 

Management 

Merely clerical? 63 

Manchuria 

Invaded by Russia, 182 
Stripped by Soviets, 183 
Russian evacuation, 183 
Red Chinese take over, 183 

Manuileky, Dimitry Z. 

Delegate to UN, 208 
Describes coexistence, 208 
Surprise attack on West, 208 

Mao Tse-tung 

Heads Chinese Reds, 181-182 
Indo-China attack, 203 
Russian overtures to, 203 
Threatens Formosa, 206 
Calls U.S. paper tiger, 206 
Capitulates to strength, 207 
Loss of prestige, 207 
Defiant of Khrushchev, 222 

Marshall, Gen. George C. 

Sent to China, 184 
Cuts U.S. aid to Chiang, 185 
Failed by Reds, 186 
Returns to U.S., 186 
Becomes Sec. of State, 186 
Wedemeyer Report on, 186 
Criticized by Ambassador, 188 
Prepares “White Paper,” 187 
Directs Inter-American 
Conference at Bogota, 240 

Martens, C. A. 

Organizes CPA, 135-136 

Marx, Edgar 
Son of Karl Marx, 20 

Marx, Eleanor 

Daughter of Karl Marx, 27 


Marx, Francisoa 

Daughter of Karl Marx, 20 

Marx, Jenny von Westphalon 
Daughter of aristocrat, 18 
Marries Marx, 13 
Family hardships, 20-22 
Death of, 27 

Marx, Karl 
Described by officer, 9 
Birth and early life, 10-11 
Letter to parents, 10-11 
Quarrels with parents, 11 
At University of Bonn, 11 
Nearly expelled, 11 
At Univ. of Berlin, 11 
Law and Philosophy, 11 
Thesis for doctorate, 12 
Anti-religious attitude, 12 
Influenced by Hegel, 12 
Promotes atheism, 12 
At Univ. of Jena, 13 
Receives Ph.D. degree, 13 
Marriage, 13 
Personal problems, 13-14 
Described by Ruhle, 14 
Meets Engels, 15 
Writes “Holy Family,” 16 
Launches Comm. League, 16 
Gains control of group, 17 
Writes “Comm. Manifesto,” 17 
French Revolution, 18-19 
Edits paper, 18 
Exiled to England, 19 
Family life, 20-21 
Economic difficulties, 20-21 
First International, 22-23 
Launches party purge, 23 
Attack on von Schweitzer, 23-24 
Attack on Bakunin, 24 
End of First Int’l., 24 
Writes “Capital," 25-26 
Break in health, 25 
Closing years, 26-27 
Death of, 27 

Marx and Communism, 28-30 
Described by Bakunin, 28-29 
Marx’s self-confidence, 29-30 
On Russian Revolution, 91-92 
Plan impractical, 327 
Mission not economic, 349 

Marx, Laura 

Daughter of Marx, 27 


Index 


Marxist Man 

Philosophical origin, 3-4 
Roadblock to progress, 5-6 

Massive Retaliation 

Inaugurated by U.S., 205 
U.S. will to wage, 207 

Materialism 

See Dialectical Materialism 
Matthews, Herbert 

Writer for New York Times, 
251 

Eulogizes Castro, 248 
Castigates Batista, 248 
Defends Castro, 251 

Mechanistic Psychology 
Idea of free will, 45-46 
How mind operates, 65 
Fallacy of theory, 80 

Memelland 

Seized by Hitler, 158 
Mensheviks 

Means “minority,” 96 
Given Lenin’s enemies, 96 

Mental Health 

As Communist tool, 262 
Midas Satellite 

1960 launching, 229 
Purpose, 229 

Middle Class 

Marx’s theory on, 77 
Miller, Robert T. 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 
Mind 

Communist idea of, 36-38 
Mechanical nature of, 65-66 

Ministers 

Ways to combat Communism, 
286-288 

Mobutu, Joseph 

Congo Army Chief, 235 
Arrests Lumumba, 235 

Motolov 

Supports Stalin in crisis, 124 
Visits White House, 163 
Seeks power, 213 
Exiled, 213-214 


Montesquieu, Baron de 
Influence on U.S., 319 

Morals 

Theory on origin of, 51 
Significance of, 51 
Doctrine of “no morals,” 52 
Not of divine origin? 52 
Fallacy of Marx’s theory, 71 
Communist view of, 304 

Morgan, J. P. 

Receives bomb in mail, 137 
Office bombed, 137 

Morse, Sen. Wayne 
Defends Castro, 248 
Critic of Batista, 248 

Motion 

Origin explained, 33 
Fallacy of theory, 39 

M arrow, Edward R. 

Defends Castro, 248 
Castigates Batista, 248 

NATO 

To isolate Reds, 204 
Nazism 

Anti-Communist origin, 157 
Hitler, leader of, 157 
Similar to Marxism, 157 

NEP (New Economic Program) 
Adopted by Lenin, 119 
Abandoned by Stalin, 122 

Nicholas II, Tsar 

Weakness as leader, 99 
War with Japan, 99 
Bloody Sunday, 100 
Rupediates Oct. Manifesto, 102 
Enters World War I, 107 
Weakness of adm., 107-108 
Visits front, 108 
Overthrown, 110-111 
Executed by Reds, 119 

Nietzsche, Frederick W. 

Pure materialist, 347 
Inspired Hitler, 348 
Invented superman, 287, 347 
Goes insane, 352 


Index 


Nino, Alberto 

Security Chief of Colombia, 240 
Writes book on Castro, 240 
Describes Bogota riots, 240 

North Korea 
Occupied by Russia, 191 
Red puppet government, 191 
Attack on South Korea, 192 
Declared aggressor by UN, 192 
Army trapped by UN, 193 

Oath 

Judicial oath of U.S., 368 
Third Commandment, 368 

October Manifesto 
People’s program, 101 
Torn up by Trotsky, 101 
Repudiated by Tsar, 102 
Unenforceable, 102 

Omonombe, Surete Chief 
Cousin of Lumumba, 234 
Commits genocide, 234 

Origin of Species 
Communist explanation, 35-36 

Orthodox Party of Cuba 
Used as front by Castro, 242 
Leaders criticize Castro, 242 

Panama Canal 

Red plans to internationalize, 
262 

Parents 

How to combat Communism, 
276-277 

Park, William Z. 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 
Peace 

Promised by Communism, 32 
Perjury 

Reason for penalty, 370-371 
Oath sacred in U.S., 370 

Perlo, Victor 

Contact of W. Chambers, 145 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

Peter, the Apostle 

On property rights, 345 


Petroleum 

U.S. produces 51% of all, 325 
Philippines 

On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
256-257 

Phillips, Ruby 

Defends Castro, 248 
Castigates Batista, 248 

Philosophy 

Somestimes confusing, 366 
Of U.S. founders, 318 

Pilgrims 

Try Communism, 132-134 

Plekhanov, George 

Exiled Marxist leader, 94 
Meets Lenin, 95 

Poland 

Attacked by Hitler, 158-159 

Divided, 159 

Taken by Russia, 180 

Poland, F. W. 

Listed by Gouzenko, 359 

Polaris Missile 
Launched in I960, 231 
Makes sneak attack obsolete, 
231, 254 

Police 

Called unnecessary, 57 
Pornography 
Communist tool, 261 
Port Arthur 

Soviet Naval Base, 182 

Porter, Rep. Charles O. 

Defends Castro, 248 
Critic of Batista, 248 

Powell, Rep. Adam Clayton 
Defends Castro, 248 
Criticizes Batista, 248 

Powers, Francis G. 

Pilot of U-2, 226 
Forced down, 226 
Testimony, 229 
Not shot down, 229 


Index 


Press 

Protected in U.S., 321 
Wavs to combat Communism, 
285-286 

Price Supports 

Effect on agriculture, 340 

Private Property 
To be abolished, 17, 57 
Origin of, 48 

Why Marxists oppose, 48 
Basis of class struggle, 48 
Makes State necessary, 49 
Bible teachings on, 70 
Marx’s error, 76-77 
Ownership instinctive. 81 
Protected by U.S., 319 
Christian principle of, 343 

Production 

Creator of society, 45-46 
Social production, 53 
Communist weakness in, 58 
Red expectations of, 59 
Not creator of society, 67 
Failure of, in Russia, 84-86 
Acreage control increases, 340 

Profintern 

Red Int’l. of Trade Unions, 138 
I million dollars to, 138 

Profits 

Marx’s theory on, 53-54 
Prosperity 

Promised by Marx, 32 

Provisional Gov. of Russia 
Set up by best people, 112 
For democracy, 111 
Recognized by Allies, 111 
Tries to save Tsar, 111 
Domestic reforms, 111 
Suppresion of Lenin, 114 
Lenin’s conquest of, 114 

Prychodoko, Nich olas 

Testifies of famine, 210-211 

Psychiatry 

Target of Communist domina- 
tion, 262 


Psychological War 

Western attitudes need change, 
258-259 

Accepting Communist slogans, 
259 

"Purge Trials" 

Stalin’s hand in, 127 
Confessions at, 127 
Called a “massacre,” 128 

Pusan 

UN beachhead, 192 
Railroads 

Part of U.S. wealth, 325 
RB-i7 Incident 
Details of, 229-230 
UN investigation sought, 230 
Russia vetoes, 230 
UN Charter violated, 230 

Red Army 

For “defense,” 80 
Built to 5 million, 118 
Ready for surprise, 208 

Red China 

Set up by Red Chinese, 187 
Recognition of, 190 
E-onomic aid to, 190 
Attack on Korea, 193 
Restricted warfare, 194 
Effect of Stalin’s death, 196 
Attack on Indo-China, 203 
Urged to attack Formosa, 203 
U.S. prisoners in, 206 
U.S. as “paper tiger,” 206 
Attack on Formosa, 206 
U.S. reply, 207 
Reds capitulate, 207 
Release U.S. prisoners, 207 
Industrialization plan fails, 255 
Fight for recognition, 259 
Desires admission to UN, 259 

Redmont, Bernard 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 
Reed, John 

Advocates Com. in U.S., 135 
Religion 

Marx anti-religious, 11-12 
19th Cent, attack on, 12 
Origin of, 50 


Index 


Communist antagonism, 50-51 
Influences of, on Marx, 62 
Fallacy of theory on, 70 
Stalin’s campaign, 123 
Manmade system, 317 
U.S. protection of, 321 
Communist view of, 306-311 
Red plan to infiltrate churches, 
261 

Reproduction 

Law of Negation, 34 
Fallacy, 39 

Revolution 

Predicted in Manifesto, 17 
Necessity for, 54-55 
Use of violence in, 55 
To be international, 56 
Purpose, 64 
In Russia, 1917, 112 
Lenin’s plan, 116 
Defended by Reds, 294-297 

Rhee, Syngman 

Appeal to UN and U.S., 192 

"Rheinische Zeitung” 

Edited by Marx, 18 

Ridgway, Gen. Matthew B. 
Replaced Gen. MacArthur, 194 

Rockefeller, John D. 

Receives bomb in mail, 137 

Rome 

Mode of Production, 68 
Reason for progress, 74-75 

Roosevelt, Franklin D. 

Different advisers, 169 
View of Wm. C. Bullitt, 170 
Warned by Churchill, 171-172 
Sees Red problem, 172 
Death of, 172 

Rosenberg, Allan 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Rosenberg, Ethel 
Wife of Julius R., 200 
Sister of D. Greenglass, 200 
Convicted of espionage, 200 
Sentenced to death, 200 
Judge Kaufman, 200-201 


Rosenberg, Julius 

Related to Greenglass, 200 
With Harry Gold, 200 
Gets atom secrets, 200 
Affects Korean War, 200 
Sentenced to death, 200 
Judge Kaufman to, 200-201 

Rosinger, Lawrence 
At Conference, 190 
On Red China, 190 
No aid to Chiang, 190 
Sacrifice Formosa, 190 

Rubottom, Ray 

Asst. Secretary of State, 248 
Defends Castro, 248-249 
Clears Castro of Red taint, 249 

Rumania 

Soviet satellite, 180-181 

Russia 

Red conquest of, 78 
Status in 1855, 90 
Reform program of 1861, 91 
Marxism in Russia, 91 
Murder of Tsar, 91 
Revolution predicted, 91 
Revolution of 1905, 99 
War with Japan, 99 
World War I, 106 
Losses during war, 107 
Revolution in Mar., ’17, 110 
Revolution in Nov., ’17, 114 
Lenin’s armistice, 116 
Election results, 115 
Marxism in Russia, 117-120 
Collapse of Red program, 119 
Civil War, 118-119 
The NEP, 120 
Stalin in power, 121 
First Five-Year Plan, 122 
U.S. Recognition of, 124 
Stalin’s purge trials, 127 
Stalin’s new class, 128 
Constitution of 1936, 129 
U.S. Reds must defend, 136 
Influence in U.S. union, 138 
Attacked by Hitler, 160 
Believed conquered, 161 
U.S. Sympathy for, 161 
U.S. Lend-Lease program, 163 
Losses in World War II, 168 
Planning of UN, 171 
Demands veto power, 171 


Index 


Arrogance of, 171 
Buffer satellites, 180 
Conquest of China, 181 
Influence in Korea, 195 
Armaments to Reds, 197 
Death of Stalin, 195 
Malenkov and Beria, 195-196 
Coexistence, 125, 204 
Stealing, A-bomb, 199-200 
Economic crisis, ’53, 201 
Satellite uprisings, 202 
Capitalism superior, 202 
U.S. steps to isolate, 204 
Khrushchev takes over, 205 
Test of U.S. policy, 205 
Soviet troops alerted, 207-208 
Illegal operations by, 293 
Revolutionary violence, 294 
View on war and peace, 297 
Communist Int’l., 299 
Diplomatic intrigue, 303 
Ethics and morals, 304 
Religion, 306 
Civil liberties, 311 
Education in, 314 
Labor unions in, 315 
Hope for humanity, 316 
Economic weakness, 220 
Squanders man power, 220 
Uses child labor, 220-221 
Sparks 1948 Bogota riots, 240- 
241 

Influence in Cuban conquest, 
249-250 

Desires continued access to 
U.S. patents, 260 
Should be isolated diplomati- 
cally, 270-271 

Should be isolated economically, 
272-273 

Russian Secret Police 
See “Cheka” 

Russian Social-Democrats 
Organized by Lenin, 95 
Becomes Bolshevik Party, 106 
Stalin’s activities in, 105 

Ruthenburg, Charles E. 

U.S. Lenin, 142 
Death affects CPA, 142 

Sabbath Day 

Red attitude toward, 123 
Fourth Commandment on, 371 


Samos Satellite 
First launched, 229 
Cameras on, 229 

Satellites 

Sputnik I, 230 
Midas Satellite, 229-231 
Samos Satellite, 229-231 
Tiros I, 231 

U.S. makes first recovery, 231 
Inflated balloon satellite, 231 
U.S. plans 15-ton satellite, 231 
Score on space race, 232 

Schurz, Carl 

Quoted on Marx, 19 

SEATO 

To isolate Reds, 204 

Shugar, Dr. David 

Listed by Gouzenko, 359 

Silverman, Abraham George 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

Silvermaster, Gregory 

Contact of E. Bentley, 150 
Advice when exposed, 149 
Returns to Gov. job, 150 

Slavery 

Economic effect, 68 
Abolished in U.S., 322 

Smith, Adam 

Influence on U.S., 319 

Smith, Bradford B. 

Quoted on economics, 328 

Smith, Earl 

U.S. Ambassador to Cuba, 245 
Resists Castro, 245 

Socialism 

Compared to Communism, 55 
Precedes Communism, 57-58 
Permanent problem, 84-86 
Failure in England, 202 
Tool of Communists, 261 

Socialist Party 

Compared to Com. Party, 55 
In Russian Revolution, 135 
Left-wing movement, 135 
Failure in England, 202 


Index 


Society 

Based on mode of prod., 44-45 
Classless, stateless, 44, 57, 80 
Fallacy of Marx’s theory, 66-71 

South America 

On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
267-258 

South Korea 
Diplomats abandon, 191 
Protected by U.S., 191 
Army ill-equipped, 191-192 
View of Owen Lattimore, 192 
Attacked by N. Korea, 192 
Invasion at Inchon, 193 
Trap N. Korean army, 193 
ROK’s up East coast, 193 
Attack by Red Chinese, 193 
Slaughter of UN troops, 193 
Gen. MacArthur replaced, 194 
Korean Armistice, 195 
Losses suffered, 196 

Soviet Russia 
See Russia 

Soybean Production 
Prospers without government 
supports, 346 

“Sputnik’’ 

Launched 1957, 230 
Product of Red espionage, 230 
U.S. — Russia launching com- 
pared, 232 

Stalin, Joseph 

Original name, 106 
Bom at Gori, 103 
Studied to be priest, 103 
Learns Marxism, 103 
Expelled from Seminary, 104 
As Marxist revolutionary, 104 
Sentenced to Siberia, 104 
Leads Bolshevik group, 104 
Joins Lenin, 104 
Criminal activities, 104-105 
Sets up Baku Soviet, 105 
Propaganda writer, 106 
Red Central Committee, 106 
Sentenced to Siberia, 106 
“The Man of Steel,” 106 
Released from Siberia, 112 
Revolutionary writing, 113 
Opposed by Lenin, 122 


Rise to power, 122 
Defeats Trotsky, 122 
First Five-Year Plan, 122 
Extermination of Kulaks, 122 
Promotes atheism, 123 
BlameB subordinates, 123 
Faces political defeat, 123 
Gains U.S. recog., 124 
Regains power, 126 
Launches party purge, 127 
Capitalist reforms of, 129 
Spoils system of, 128-130 
Overtures to Hitler, 157 
Overtures to West, 158 
Pact with Hitler, 159 
Credit for World War II, 169 
Pact with Japan, 160 
Attacked by Hitler, 160 
Soviet Losses, 168 
Visit of H. Hopkins, 178 
UN boycott threat, 179 
Death of, 195 
Malenkov replaces, 195 
Khrushchev, hatchet man of, 
213 

Dislikes Khrushchev, 210 
Promised Satellites freedom, 
274 

Stas sen, Harold 

Alarmed by State Dept., 189 
Enumerates policies, 189 

State 

To be abolished, 17-18 
Marx’s theory on, 49 
Tool of property class, 49 
To wither away, 68 
Fallacy of theory, 67 
Marx’s “mob rule,” 84 

Stealing 

Eighth Commandment, 374 
Communist Commandment, 874 

Steel 

47% produced in U.S., 325 

Sterling, Dr. Marquez 
Contacts Castro, 245 
Plea for free elections in Cuba, 
245 

Candidate for President of 
Cuba, 251-252 

Stratemeyer, Gen. Geo. E. 
Testifies on Korea, 195 


Index 


Strauss, David Friedrich 
Attack on Christianity, 12 
Writes “Life of Jesus,” 12 

Stuart, Dr. John Leighton 
Ambassador to China, 188 
Admits taken in by Reds, 188 
Critcizes White Paper, 188-189 
Attends strategy conf., 189 

Students 

Ways to combat Communism, 
280-281 

Subversive Activities Control Bd. 
Orders CPA to register, 136 

Sullivan, Ed 

Defends Castro, 248 
Castigates Batista, 248 

Sunday 

Red attitude toward, 123 

Taylor, William 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

Technology 

Fallacy of Marx’s theory, 77 
Teachers 

Ways to combat Communism, 
277-280 

Ten Commandments 

Communist attempt at interpre- 
tation of, 71 

Why Reds fear, 317, 368-375 
Tenney, Helen 

Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 

Timetable of Conquest 

Red timetable outline, 253-258 
Right on schedule, 258 

Tiros I 

Launched in 1960, 231 
Uses solar batteries, 231 
Carries television, 231 

Tito, Marshal 

Predicts fall of West, 175-176 

Treaty of Brest-Litovsk 
Sacrifices of Russians, 117 


Trotsky, Leon 
Original name, 97 
Birth, 97 

Family and background, 97 
Training in materialism, 97 
Marriage, 98 
Edits illegal paper, 98 
Sentenced to Siberia, 98 
Escapes to England, 98 
Assumes name of jailer, 98 
Meets Lenin, 98 
Opposes Lenin, 98 
Fame as orator, 99 
Repudiates Oct. Manifesto, 101 
Continues Rev. of 1905, 101 
Exiled to Siberia, 102 
Escapes to Finland, 102 
Perpetual Revolution, 102 
Full-fledged Bolshevik, 102, 114 
Exile in New York, 112 
Return to Russia, 112 
Incites counter-rev., 113 
Heads Red Army, 114 
Attack on Prov. Gov., 114 
Red Army 5 million, 118 
Defeated by Stalin, 122 
Assassinated in Mexico, 148 

T ruman, Pres. Harry S. 

Reversed diplomats, 192 
Recalls MacArthur, 194 

Tshombe, Premier Moise 
Premier of Katanga, 235 
An i-Communist and pro-West, 
235-236 

Resisted by Hammarskjold, 235 
236 

Defies UN, 236 
Seeks aid of Belgiums, 236 
Calls Congolese Summit Con- 
ference, 236 

U. S. Army 
Reds to infiltrate, 136 
Reds to get higher priority, 163 

U-2 Incident 

Details of, 226-229 
Exploited by Khrushchev, 227 
Flights not illegal, 227-228 
Value of, 228 

Exposed Soviet weakness, 229 
Photos taken by, 228-229 
Flights discontinued, 229 


Index 


406 


Ukraine 

Man-made famine, 210-212 
Under Khrushchev, 210-212 
Welcome Nazis, 212 
Khrushchev vengeance, 212 

U liman, Wm. Ludwig 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 151 

Ulyanov, Vladimir Ilich 
See Nikolai Lenin 

United Front 

Russian strategy, 158 

United Nations 
Alger Hiss in, 144 
First plannned in 1944, 171 
Russia demands veto, 171 
San Francisco meeting, 172 
Charter vs. Soviet Const., 172 
Why Charter unworkable, 173 
Stalin boycott threat, 179 
Red attitude toward, 179 
Dean Acheson and UN, 190-191 
Declares N. Korea wrong, 192 
UN in Korea, 192-193 
Weakness manifest, 193-197 
Left-wing influence in, 194 
Used to isolate Reds, 204 
Holding UN prisoners, 206 
Weakness during Hungarian 
Revolution, 217 
Investigation of Hungarian 
Revolution, 220 
Bang-Jensen case, 217-219 
Reds violate Charter, 217 
Intervention in Congo, 234-236 
Resisted by Congolese, 235-236 
Accused of colonial imperial- 
ism, 236 

Attacked by Khrushchev, 236 
Red goals concerning, 260 
Solution to problems of, 265-269 

United States 

Recognizes Russian Gov., 124 
No recog. of Red Gov’t., 124-125 
Recognition in 1933, 125 
Subversion of U.S., 131 
Communism in U.S., 132 
Red violence in U.S., 137 
A Russian organizes CPA, 135 
U.S. sympathy for Russia, 161- 
162 

Russia as U.S. ally, 161 


Lend-Lease to Russia, 163-166 
Loses A-bomb secret, 166-168 
Planning of UN, 171 
Foster predicts conquest, 175 
U.S. in Korean War, 192-196 
Lessons learned in Korea, 196 
U.S. abandons apeasement 
policies, 196 

Isolates Red aggression, 204 
Revolution predicted, 131 
Productive strength, 263-266, 
323-326 

Nation of capitalists, 337-338 
Capitalist defined, 337 
First free nation, 317-323 
Built by liberals, 318 
Founders not of proletariat 
class, 261, 318-319 
Basic philosophy in, 318 
Philosophy becomes reality, 320 
175 years of liberalism, 323 
Capitalism in, 267-282, 327-342 
Improvement of labor in, 338 
Failure of socialism in, 340 
On Red Timetable of Conquest, 
256-257 

To be isolated by Reds, 256 
Red peace offensive, 256 
Red coexistence with, 256 
Key to Western survival, 257- 
258 

U.S. Civil War 

Significance of, 322 

U.S. Constitution 

Significance of, 320-322 
Red attack on, 261 

U.S.S.R. Military Intelligence 
Used U.S. Communists, 143 
Chambers works for, 143 
E. Bentley works for, 148 

Utopia 

Influence on Marx, 62 
Marx rejects brotherhood, 62 

Value 

Created by workers, 53 
Theory of “surplus value,” 54 
Psychological, not real, 331 

Van Fleet, Gen. James A. 

Testifies on Korean War, 195 


Index 


Violence 

Important in Revolution, 55 
Class against class, 57 
Era of no violence, 58 
Use against proletariat, 80 
Wave strikes U.S., 137 

Vishinsky, Andrei 
Russian delegate to UN, 197 
Red arms sent China, 197 

Von Schweitzer, Herr 
Purged by Marx, 23 

Wadleigh, Henry J. 

Contact of W. Chambers, 145 

Wages 

Marx’s theory of, 53-54 
To be abolished, 58 
Fallacy of theory, 77 
Russian example, 117 
Wages in U.S., 338 
Wages under NEP, 120 

War 

See Korean War 
See World War I 
See World War II 
See World War III 
Reds make war inescapable, 
223-225 

Reds quoted on war, 297 
Ware, Harold 

Contact of W. Chambers, 145 

Warsaw Pact 
Violated in Hungary, 215 

Wealth 

Who creates it? 52 
To be confiscated, 54 
Shared more uniformly under 
capitalism, 76, 342 

Wedemeyer Report on China 
By Gen. A. C. Wedemeyer, 186 
Gen. Marshall criticized, 186 
Buried in files, 187 

Western Germany 

Prospers under capitalism, 335 

Wheat 

Price supports effect on, 340 


Wheeler, Donald Niven 
Contact of Eliz. Bentley, 152 
White, Harry Dexter 
Asst. Sec. Treasury, 144 
Author of American Morgen- 
thau Plan, 144 
Contact of W. Chambers, 144 

White Russians 
Oppose Lenin, 118 
Launch civil war, 118 
Supplies from Allies, 118 

Wieland, William. 

State Department Caribbean 
Director, 248 
Defends Castro, 248-249 
Clears Castro of Red taint, 249 

Willsher, Kathleen Mary 
Listed by Gouzenko, 359 

Wilson, Woodrow 
On coexistence, 274-275 

Wolfers, Dr. Arnold 
Quoted on disarmament, 263 

Women 

“Nationalized women,” 72 
Violated women, 73 
Pilgrim women, 133 

Work 

Incentive taken away, 82 
Incentives for work, 82 
Overcome inertia, 330 
Tenth Commandment, 365 

Worker’s Educational Society 
Taken over by Marx, 17 

Working Class 
Produces all wealth? 53 
Receives all proceeds? 53 
Exploited by Capitalism? 54 
To seize all factories, 53 
Uprising of, inevitable, 54 
Dictatorship of, 58 
Armed even under Comm., 58 
Antagonism lacking, 75 
Status under Capitalism, 75 
Status in U.S., 338 

World Court 

Expanded powers sought, 262 


Index 


World War I 

How it began, 106 
Nations involved, 106-107 
Collapse of Eastern Front, 107 
Russia taken out of, 116 
Armistice, 119 

World War II 
Stalin triggers, 159 
Hitler attacks Russia, 160 
Stalin’s pact with Japan, 160 
Pearl Harbor attack, 161 


Soviet losses in, 168 
Soviet attitudes, 174 

World War III 
Predicted by Soviets, 175-176 
Yalta Agreement 
Members of, 182 
Effect on China, 182 
Advantage to Reds, 182, 191 

Yeshov 

Heads Stalin’s police, 128 
Arrested, 128-129